Ropa de Moda

Weekly Address: Energy Security Can Only Come If We Invest in Cleaner Fuels and Greater Efficiency | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff 2009 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff Ethics Pledge Waivers Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense The Way Forward in Afghanistan Disabilities Economy Financial Reform Innovation Startup America Education Educate to Innovate Higher Education Race to the Top Commencement Challenge Energy & Environment A Secure Energy Future A New Foundation Deepwater BP Oil Spill Ethics Family Fiscal Responsibility Foreign Policy Japan Earthquake and Tsunami Trip to Asia 2010 Haiti Earthquake Speech in Cairo Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Poverty Rural State Fair Tour Seniors & Social Security Service Taxes Tax Cuts, Unemployment Insurance and Jobs Technology Urban Policy Veterans Women Additional Issues The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet 2010 Video Reports White House Staff Chief of Staff Bill Daley Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Interactive Tour History White House Rooms White House Art Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Recent Class Staff Bios White House Internships The Story About Us Program Apply Here Submit a Recommendation Tours & Events 2011 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Holidays 2010 Inside the White House Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('.topnav-feature','#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases   table.system-status-report th, table td, table th { padding: 5px;}.item-list ul.pager {margin: 0;}.view-display-id-page_1 {padding: 20px;}.node-form .text {width:95%;}.node-form, #node-delete-confirm, #user-login {max-width:648px;}dl.node-type-list {max-width: 615px; padding: 20px; margin: 20px;}#edit-delete, div.submenu.revisions {display: none;}ul.secondary li {display: block;}ul.secondary a.active {border-bottom: 1px solid #999;} The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release April 02, 2011 Weekly Address: Energy Security Can Only Come If We Invest in Cleaner Fuels and Greater Efficiency

WASHINGTON – In his weekly address, President Obama discussed his strategy to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and secure our nation’s energy future.  When the President was elected, America imported eleven million barrels of oil a day.  This week he announced a bold, but achievable goal of cutting this number by one-third by 2025.
 
To achieve this goal we will increase responsible domestic oil and gas development in the short term, while also increasing efficiency and harnessing new technologies including biofuels, natural gas, and advanced batteries.  And through the Clean Fleets Partnership, large companies, such as UPS, FedEx, AT&T, Verizon, and PepsiCo, will help boost the market for clean fuels by switching their fleets over to electric and alternative vehicles.
 
The audio of the address is and video of the address will be available online at www.whitehouse.gov at 6:00 a.m. ET, Saturday, April 2, 2011.

Remarks of President Barack Obama
As Prepared for Delivery
Landover, Maryland
April 2, 2011

Hello, everybody.  I’m speaking to you today from a UPS customer center in Landover, Maryland, where I came to talk about an issue that’s affecting families and businesses just like this one – the rising price of gas, and what we can do as a country to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.
 
This week, I released a Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future.  It’s a strategy to reduce the oil we import from around the world, and to make our economy stronger at home.  Part of this strategy involves increasing our oil exploration right here in America.  In fact, our oil production last year reached its highest level since 2003, and we want to encourage more safe, responsible drilling where we can.
 
But the truth is, drilling alone is not a real strategy to replace our dependence on foreign oil.  And that’s because even though America uses 25 percent of the world’s oil, we currently have only about 2 percent of the world’s oil reserves.  Even if we used every last drop of all the oil we have, it wouldn’t be enough to meet our long-term energy needs.  So, real energy security can only come if we find ways to use less oil – if we invest in cleaner fuels and greater efficiency.
 
That’s what we’ve been doing since I took office.  For example, we secured an agreement from all the major auto companies to raise the fuel efficiency of their cars and trucks.  So if you buy a new car, the better gas mileage is going to save you about $3,000.  Altogether, this will save us about 1.8 billion barrels of oil as a country.
 
We need to build on this progress.  As we make our cars and trucks more efficient, we’ve got to harness new technologies to fuel our vehicles with everything from biofuels to natural gas to advanced batteries.  And the good news is, these technologies aren’t science fiction anymore.  They exist today.  Already, American car companies are producing electric vehicles that use little or no gas.  And innovators across America are testing new products that hold incredible promise not just for new vehicles, but for countless new jobs.
 
To help jumpstart this market, the federal government has doubled the number of clean energy vehicles that we have in our fleet.  In the next few years, we’re going to switch the entire fleet over.  And I’m here at UPS because it’s not just the government getting in on the action.  Companies like UPS, FedEx, AT&T, Verizon, and PepsiCo – firms with some of the largest fleets in the country – are switching to more efficient vehicles.  And through our Clean Fleets Partnership, driven not by government, but by business, more companies are going to be switching to electric and alternative vehicles, too – not out of the goodness of their hearts, but because it’s good for their bottom lines.
 
The goal is simple.  When I was elected to this office, America imported 11 million barrels of oil a day.  Through these and other steps, by a little more than a decade from now, we will have cut that by one third.  And by doing so, we’re going to make our economy less vulnerable to wild swings in oil prices.  We’re going to use cleaner sources of energy that don’t imperil our climate.  And we’re going to spark new products and businesses all over the country by tapping America’s greatest renewable resource: our ingenuity.
 
We know how important that is. This week, we learned that the economy added 230,000 private sector jobs last month.  That makes 1.8 million private sector jobs created in the last thirteen months.  That’s a good sign.  But we have to keep up the momentum, and transitioning to a clean energy economy will help us do that.  It will ensure that the United States of America is home to the jobs and industries of tomorrow.  That’s how we’ll win the future.  And that’s how we’ll leave our children an America that is more secure and prosperous than before.
 
Thanks, and have a great weekend.

Watch the Video April 02, 2011 5:30 AMWeekly Address: Gas Prices & Energy Security Blog posts on this issue April 02, 2011 5:30 AM EDTWeekly Address: Gas Prices & Energy Security

Speaking from a UPS customer center as part of the new public-private Green Fleet Partnership, the President discusses his Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future to help free us from oil and boost the American economy.

April 01, 2011 8:03 PM EDTCommemorating 50 Years of Peace and Friendship Through Service

Aaron S. Williams, Director of the Peace Corps and former Peace Corps volunteer in the Dominican Republic, reflects on the importance of community service and the impact Peace Corps has had in communities around the world.

April 01, 2011 7:57 PM EDTGoing Green and Saving Green

The White House Council on Environmental Quality answers a question from Twitter on how the U.S. is going green without raising the deficit.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrMySpaceYouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Family Fiscal Responsibility Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Poverty Rural Seniors & Social Security Service Taxes Technology Urban Policy Veterans Women Additional Issues The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Interactive Tour History Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Inside the White House Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Subscribe to RSS Feeds Apply for a Job

Fuente: whitehouse.gov

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

Georgetown University
Washington, D.C.

11:36 A.M. EDT

     THE PRESIDENT:  Thank you so much.  Thank you, everybody.  (Applause.)  Everybody, please have a seat.  Please have a seat. It is wonderful to be back at Georgetown.  (Applause.)

We've got a number of acknowledgements.  First of all, I just want to thank President DeGioia for his outstanding leadership here, but also for his hospitality. 

We also have here Secretary Steven Chu, my Energy Secretary. Where is Steven?  There he is over there.  (Applause.)  Secretary Ken Salazar of the Interior Department.  (Applause.)  Secretary Tom Vilsack, our Agriculture Secretary.  (Applause.)  Ray LaHood, our Transportation Secretary.  (Applause.)  Lisa Jackson, our EPA Administrator.  (Applause.)  Nancy Sutley, who is our Council on Environmental Quality director, right here.  (Applause.) 

A couple of great members of Congress -- Congressman Jay Inslee of Washington.  Where’s Jay?  There he is over there.  (Applause.)  And Rush Holt of New Jersey is here.  (Applause.)  We've got -- he didn’t bring the weather with him -- but the mayor of Los Angeles, Antonio Villaraigosa, is in the house.  (Applause.)  Mayor Scott Smith of Mesa, Arizona, is here.  (Applause.) 

And most importantly, the students of Georgetown University are in the house.  (Applause.) 

I want to start with a difficult subject:  The Hoyas had a tough loss, Coach.  (Laughter.)  Coach is here, too, and I love Coach Thompson.  I love his dad and the great tradition that they’ve had.  (Applause.)  And it turned out VCU was pretty good. (Laughter.)  I had Georgetown winning that game in my bracket, so we’re all hurting here.  (Laughter.)  But that's what next year is for. 

We meet here at a tumultuous time for the world.  In a matter of months, we’ve seen regimes toppled.  We've seen democracy take root in North Africa and in the Middle East.  We’ve witnessed a terrible earthquake, a catastrophic tsunami, a nuclear emergency that has battered one of our strongest allies and closest friends in the world’s third-largest economy.  We’ve led an international effort in Libya to prevent a massacre and maintain stability throughout the broader region.  (Applause.) 

And as Americans, we’re heartbroken by the lives that have been lost as a result of these events.  We’re deeply moved by the thirst for freedom in so many nations, and we’re moved by the strength and the perseverance of the Japanese people.  And it’s natural, I think, to feel anxious about what all of this means for us.

And one big area of concern has been the cost and security of our energy.  Obviously, the situation in the Middle East implicates our energy security.  The situation in Japan leads us to ask questions about our energy sources.

In an economy that relies so heavily on oil, rising prices at the pump affect everybody -– workers, farmers, truck drivers, restaurant owners, students who are lucky enough to have a car.  (Laughter.)  Businesses see rising prices at the pump hurt their bottom line.  Families feel the pinch when they fill up their tank.  And for Americans that are already struggling to get by, a hike in gas prices really makes their lives that much harder.  It hurts. 

If you’re somebody who works in a relatively low-wage job and you’ve got to commute to work, it takes up a big chunk of your income.  You may not be able to buy as many groceries.  You may have to cut back on medicines in order to fill up the gas tank.  So this is something that everybody is affected by.

Now, here’s the thing -– we have been down this road before. Remember, it was just three years ago that gas prices topped $4 a gallon.  I remember because I was in the middle of a presidential campaign.  Working folks certainly remember because it hit a lot of people pretty hard.  And because we were at the height of political season, you had all kinds of slogans and gimmicks and outraged politicians -- they were waving their three-point plans for $2 a gallon gas.  You remember that -- “drill, baby, drill”
-- and we were going through all that.  (Laughter.)  And none of it was really going to do anything to solve the problem.  There was a lot of hue and cry, a lot of fulminating and hand-wringing, but nothing actually happened.  Imagine that in Washington.  (Laughter.) 

The truth is, none of these gimmicks, none of these slogans made a bit of difference.  When gas prices finally did fall, it was mostly because the global recession had led to less demand for oil.  Companies were producing less; the demand for petroleum went down; prices went down.  Now that the economy is recovering, demand is back up.  Add the turmoil in the Middle East, and it’s not surprising that oil prices are higher.  And every time the price of a barrel of oil on the world market rises by $10, a gallon of gas goes up by about 25 cents.

The point is the ups and downs in gas prices historically have tended to be temporary.  But when you look at the long-term trends, there are going to be more ups in gas prices than downs in gas prices.  And that’s because you’ve got countries like India and China that are growing at a rapid clip, and as 2 billion more people start consuming more goods -- they want cars just like we’ve got cars; they want to use energy to make their lives a little easier just like we’ve got -- it is absolutely certain that demand will go up a lot faster than supply.  It’s just a fact.

So here’s the bottom line:  There are no quick fixes.  Anybody who tells you otherwise isn’t telling you the truth.  And we will keep on being a victim to shifts in the oil market until we finally get serious about a long-term policy for a secure, affordable energy future. 

We’re going to have to think long term, which is why I came here, to talk to young people here at Georgetown, because you have more of a stake in us getting our energy policy right than just about anybody.

Now, here’s a source of concern, though.  We’ve known about the dangers of our oil dependence for decades.  Richard Nixon talked about freeing ourselves from dependence on foreign oil.  And every President since that time has talked about freeing ourselves from dependence on foreign oil.  Politicians of every stripe have promised energy independence, but that promise has so far gone unmet. 

I talked about reducing America’s dependence on oil when I was running for President, and I’m proud of the historic progress that we’ve made over the last two years towards that goal, and we’ll talk about that a little bit.  But I’ve got to be honest.  We’ve run into the same political gridlock, the same inertia that has held us back for decades. 

That has to change.  That has to change.  We cannot keep going from shock when gas prices go up to trance when they go back down -- we go back to doing the same things we’ve been doing until the next time there’s a price spike, and then we’re shocked again.  We can’t rush to propose action when gas prices are high and then hit the snooze button when they fall again.  We can’t keep on doing that.

The United States of America cannot afford to bet our long-term prosperity, our long-term security on a resource that will eventually run out, and even before it runs out will get more and more expensive to extract from the ground.  We can’t afford it when the costs to our economy, our country, and our planet are so high.  Not when your generation needs us to get this right.  It’s time to do what we can to secure our energy future.

And today, I want to announce a new goal, one that is reasonable, one that is achievable, and one that is necessary. 
When I was elected to this office, America imported 11 million barrels of oil a day.  By a little more than a decade from now, we will have cut that by one-third.  That is something that we can achieve.  (Applause.)  We can cut our oil dependence -- we can cut our oil dependence by a third.

I set this goal knowing that we’re still going to have to import some oil.  It will remain an important part of our energy portfolio for quite some time, until we’ve gotten alternative energy strategies fully in force.  And when it comes to the oil we import from other nations, obviously we’ve got to look at neighbors like Canada and Mexico that are stable and steady and reliable sources.  We also have to look at other countries like Brazil.  Part of the reason I went down there is to talk about energy with the Brazilians.  They recently discovered significant new oil reserves, and we can share American technology and know-how with them as they develop these resources.

But our best opportunities to enhance our energy security can be found in our own backyard -- because we boast one critical, renewable resource that the rest of the world can’t match:  American ingenuity.  American ingenuity, American know-how.

To make ourselves more secure, to control our energy future, we’re going to have to harness all of that ingenuity.  It’s a task we won’t be finished with by the end of my presidency, or even by the end of the next presidency.  But if we continue the work that we’ve already begun over the last two years, we won’t just spark new jobs, industries and innovations -- we will leave your generation and future generations with a country that is safer, that is healthier, and that’s more prosperous. 

So today, my administration is releasing a Blueprint for a Secure Energy Future that outlines a comprehensive national energy policy, one that we’ve been pursuing since the day I took office.  And cutting our oil dependence by a third is part of that plan. 

Here at Georgetown, I’d like to talk in broad strokes about how we can achieve these goals.

Now, meeting the goal of cutting our oil dependence depends largely on two things:  first, finding and producing more oil at home; second, reducing our overall dependence on oil with cleaner alternative fuels and greater efficiency.

This begins by continuing to increase America’s oil supply. Even for those of you who are interested in seeing a reduction in our dependence on fossil fuels -- and I know how passionate young people are about issues like climate change -- the fact of the matter is, is that for quite some time, America is going to be still dependent on oil in making its economy work. 

Now, last year, American oil production reached its highest level since 2003.  And for the first time in more than a decade, oil we imported accounted for less than half of the liquid fuel we consumed.  So that was a good trend.  To keep reducing that reliance on imports, my administration is encouraging offshore oil exploration and production -- as long as it’s safe and responsible. 

I don’t think anybody here has forgotten what happened last year, where we had to deal with the largest oil spill in [our] history. I know some of the fishermen down in the Gulf Coast haven’t forgotten it.  And what we learned from that disaster helped us put in place smarter standards of safety and responsibility.  For example, if you’re going to drill in deepwater, you’ve got to prove before you start drilling that you can actually contain an underwater spill.  That’s just common sense.  And lately, we’ve been hearing folks saying, well, the Obama administration, they put restrictions on how oil companies operate offshore.  Well, yes, because we just spent all that time, energy and money trying to clean up a big mess.  And I don't know about you, but I don't have amnesia.  I remember these things.  (Laughter.)  And I think it was important for us to make sure that we prevent something like that from happening again.  (Applause.)

Now, today, we’re working to expedite new drilling permits for companies that meet these higher standards.  Since they were put in, we’ve approved 39 new shallow-water permits; we’ve approved seven deepwater permits in recent weeks.  When it comes to drilling offshore, my administration approved more than two permits last year for every new well that the industry started to drill.  So any claim that my administration is responsible for gas prices because we’ve “shut down” oil production, any claim like that is simply untrue.  It might make for a useful sound bite, but it doesn’t track with reality.

What is true is we’ve said if you’re going to drill offshore you’ve got to have a plan to make sure that we don’t have the kind of catastrophe that we had last year.  And I don’t think that there’s anybody who should dispute that that’s the right strategy to pursue.

Moreover, we’re actually pushing the oil industry to take advantage of the opportunities that they’ve already got.  Right now the industry holds tens of millions of acres of leases where they’re not producing a single drop.  They’re just sitting on supplies of American energy that are ready to be tapped.  That’s why part of our plan is to provide new and better incentives that promote rapid, responsible development of these resources. 

We’re also exploring and assessing new frontiers for oil and gas development from Alaska to the Mid- and South Atlantic states, because producing more oil in America can help lower oil prices, can help create jobs, and can enhance our energy security, but we’ve got to do it in the right way.

Now, even if we increase domestic oil production, that is not going to be the long-term solution to our energy challenge.  I give out this statistic all the time, and forgive me for repeating it again:  America holds about 2 percent of the world’s proven oil reserves.  What that means is, is that even if we drilled every drop of oil out of every single one of the reserves that we possess -- offshore and onshore -- it still wouldn’t be enough to meet our long-term needs.  We consume about 25 percent of the world’s oil.  We only have 2 percent of the reserves.  Even if we doubled U.S. oil production, we’re still really short. 
So the only way for America’s energy supply to be truly secure is by permanently reducing our dependence on oil.  We’re going to have to find ways to boost our efficiency so we use less oil.  We’ve got to discover and produce cleaner, renewable sources of energy that also produce less carbon pollution, which is threatening our climate.  And we’ve got to do it quickly. 

Now, in terms of new sources of energy, we have a few different options.  The first is natural gas.  Recent innovations have given us the opportunity to tap large reserves –- perhaps a century’s worth of reserves, a hundred years worth of reserves -– in the shale under our feet.  But just as is true in terms of us extracting oil from the ground, we’ve got to make sure that we’re extracting natural gas safely, without polluting our water supply. 

That’s why I’ve asked Secretary Chu, my Energy Secretary, to work with other agencies, the natural gas industry, states, and environmental experts to improve the safety of this process.  And Chu is the right guy to do this.  He’s got a Nobel Prize in physics.  He actually deserved his Nobel Prize.  (Laughter and applause.)  And this is the kind of thing that he likes to do for fun on the weekend.  (Laughter.)  He goes into his garage and he tinkers around and figures out how to extract natural gas.  (Laughter.)  

I’m going to embarrass him further.  (Laughter.)  Last year, when we were trying to fill -- figure out how to close the cap, I sent Chu down to sit in the BP offices, and he essentially designed the cap that ultimately worked, and he drew up the specs for it and had BP build it, construct it.  So this is somebody who knows what he’s doing.  (Applause.)  So for those of you who are studying physics, it may actually pay off someday.  (Laughter.) 

But the potential for natural gas is enormous.  And this is an area where there’s actually been some broad bipartisan agreement.  Last year, more than 150 members of Congress from both sides of the aisle produced legislation providing incentives to use clean-burning natural gas in our vehicles instead of oil. And that's a big deal.  Getting 150 members of Congress to agree on anything is a big deal.  And they were even joined by T. Boone Pickens, a businessman who made his fortune on oil, but who is out there making the simple point that we can’t simply drill our way out of our energy problems. 

So I ask members of Congress and all the interested parties involved to keep at it, pass a bill that helps us achieve the goal of extracting natural gas in a safe, environmentally sound way.

Now, another substitute for oil that holds tremendous promise is renewable biofuels -– not just ethanol, but biofuels made from things like switchgrass and wood chips and biomass. 

If anybody doubts the potential of these fuels, consider Brazil.  As I said, I was just there last week.  Half of Brazil’s vehicles can run on biofuels -- half of their fleet of automobiles can run on biofuels instead of petroleum.  Just last week, our Air Force -- our own Air Force -- used an advanced biofuel blend to fly a Raptor 22 -- an F-22 Raptor faster than the speed of sound.  Think about that.  I mean, if an F-22 Raptor can fly at the speed of -- faster than the speed of sound on biomass, then I know the old beater that you’ve got, that you’re driving around in -- (laughter) -- can probably do so, too.  There’s no reason why we can’t have our cars do the same.

In fact, the Air Force is aiming to get half of its domestic jet fuel from alternative sources by 2016.  And I’m directing the Navy and the Department of Energy and Agriculture to work with the private sector to create advanced biofuels that can power not just fighter jets, but also trucks and commercial airliners.

So there’s no reason we shouldn’t be using these renewable fuels throughout America.  And that’s why we’re investing in things like fueling stations and research into the next generation of biofuels.  One of the biggest problems we have with alternative energy is not just producing the energy, but also distributing it.  We’ve got gas stations all around the country, so whenever you need gas you know you can fill up -- it doesn’t matter where you are.  Well, we’ve got to have that same kind of distribution network when it comes to our renewable energy sources so that when you are converting to a different kind of car that runs on a different kind of energy, you’re going to be able to have that same convenience.  Otherwise, the market won’t work; it won’t grow.  

Over the next two years, we’ll help entrepreneurs break ground for four next-generation biorefineries -– each with a capacity of more than 20 million gallons per year.  And going forward, we should look for ways to reform biofuels incentives to make sure that they’re meeting today’s challenges and that they’re also saving taxpayers money. 

So as we replace oil with fuels like natural gas and biofuels, we can also reduce our dependence by making cars and trucks that use less oil in the first place.  Seventy percent of our petroleum consumption goes to transportation -- 70 percent.  And by the way, so does the second biggest chunk of most families’ budgets goes into transportation.  And that’s why one of the best ways to make our economy less dependent on oil and save folks more money is to make our transportation sector more efficient.

Now, we went through 30 years where we didn’t raise fuel efficiency standards on cars.  And part of what happened in the U.S. auto industry was because oil appeared relatively cheap, the U.S. auto industry decided we’re just going to make our money on SUVs, and we’re not going to worry about fuel efficiency.  Thirty years of lost time when it comes to technology that could improve the efficiency of cars. 

So last year, we established a groundbreaking national fuel efficiency standard for cars and trucks.  We did this last year without legislation.  We just got all the parties together and we got them to agree -- automakers, autoworkers, environmental groups, industry. 

     So that means our cars will be getting better gas mileage, saving 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the life of the program -- 1.8 billion.  Our consumers will save money from fewer trips to the pump -– $3,000 on average over time you will save because of these higher fuel efficiency standards.  And our automakers will build more innovative products.  Right now, there are even cars rolling off the assembly lines in Detroit with combustion engines -- I’m not talking about hybrids -- combustion engines that get more than 50 miles per gallon.  So we know how to do it.  We know how to make our cars more efficient. 

But going forward, we’re going to continue to work with the automakers, with the autoworkers, with states, to ensure the high-quality, fuel-efficient cars and trucks of tomorrow are built right here in the United States of America.  That’s going to be a top priority for us.  (Applause.)

This summer, we’re going to propose the first-ever fuel efficiency standards for heavy-duty trucks.  And this fall, we’ll announce the next round of fuel standards for cars that builds on what we’ve already done. 

And by the way, the federal government is going to need to lead by example.  The fleet of cars and trucks we use in the federal government is one of the largest in the country.  We’ve got a lot of cars.  And that’s why we’ve already doubled the number of alternative vehicles in the federal fleet.  And that’s why today I am directing agencies to purchase 100 percent alternative fuel, hybrid, or electric vehicles by 2015.  All of them should be alternative fuel.  (Applause.)

Going forward, we’ll partner with private companies that want to upgrade their large fleets.  And this means, by the way, that you students, as consumers or future consumers of cars, you’ve got to make sure that you are boosting demand for alternative vehicles.  You’re going to have a responsibility as well, because if alternative-fuel vehicles are manufactured but you guys aren’t buying them, then folks will keep on making cars that don’t have the same fuel efficiency.  So you’ve got power in this process, and the decisions you make individually in your lives will say something about how serious we are when it comes to energy independence.

We’ve also made historic investments in high-speed rail and mass transit, because part of making our transportation sector cleaner and more efficient involves offering all Americans, whether they are urban, suburban, or rural, the choice to be mobile without having to get in a car and pay for gas.

Still, there are few breakthroughs as promising for increasing fuel efficiency and reducing our dependence on oil as electric vehicles.  Soon after I took office, I set a goal of having one million electric vehicles on our roads by 2015.  We’ve created incentives for American companies to develop these vehicles, and for Americans who want them to buy them. 

So new manufacturing plants are opening over the next few years.  And a modest $2 billion investment in competitive grants for companies to develop the next generation of batteries for these cars has jumpstarted a big new American industry.  Pretty soon, America will be home to 40 percent of global manufacturing capacity for these advanced batteries. 

And for those of you who are wondering what that means, the thing that’s been holding back electric vehicles is the battery that stores that electricity, that energy.  And the more efficient, the more lightweight we can make those batteries, the easier it is to manufacture those cars at a competitive price.

And if we can have that industry here in the United States of America, that means jobs.  If those batteries are made here, the cars are made here.  Those cars are made here, we’re putting Americans back to work.

Now, to make sure we stay on this goal we’re going to need to do more -– by offering more powerful incentives to consumers, and by rewarding the communities that pave the way for the adoption of these vehicles.

Now, one other thing about electric cars -- and you don't need to talk to Chu about this -- it turns out electric cars run on electricity.  (Laughter.)  And so even if we reduce our oil dependency, and we’re producing all these great electric cars, we’re going to have to have a plan to change the way we generate electricity in America so that it’s cleaner and safer and healthier.  We know that ushering in a clean energy economy has the potential of creating untold numbers of new jobs and new businesses right here in the United States.  But we’re going to have to think about how do we produce electricity more efficiently.

Now, in addition to producing it, we actually also have to think about making sure we’re not wasting energy.  I don't know how we’re doing on the Georgetown campus, Mr. President, but every institution and every household has to start thinking about how are we reducing the amount of energy that we’re using and doing it in more efficient ways.

Today, our homes and businesses consume 40 percent of the energy that we use, and it costs us billions of dollars in energy bills.  Manufacturers that require large amounts of energy to make their products, they're challenged by rising energy costs.  And so you can’t separate the issue of oil dependence from the issue of how we are producing generally -- more energy generally. 

And that’s why we’ve proposed new programs to help Americans upgrade their homes and businesses and plants with new, energy-efficient building materials -- new lighting, new windows, new heating and cooling systems -– investments that will save consumers and business owners tens of billions of dollars a year, and free up money for investment and hiring and creating new jobs and hiring more workers and putting contractors to work as well.

The nice thing about energy efficiency is we already have the technology.  We don’t have to create something new.  We just have to help businesses and homeowners put in place the installation, the energy-efficient windows, the energy-efficient lighting.  They’ll get their money back.  You will save money on your electricity bill that pays for those improvements that you made, but a lot of people may not have the money up front, and so we’ve got to give them some incentives to do that.

And just like the fuels we use in our cars, we’re going to have to find cleaner renewable sources of electricity.  Today, about two-fifths of our electricity come from clean energy sources.  But we can do better than that.  I think that with the right incentives in place, we can double our use of clean energy. And that’s why, in my State of the Union address back in January, I called for a new Clean Energy Standard for America:  By 2035, 80 percent of our electricity needs to come from a wide range of clean energy sources -- renewables like wind and solar, efficient natural gas.  And, yes, we’re going to have to examine how do we make clean coal and nuclear power work.

Now, in light of the ongoing events in Japan, I want to just take a minute to talk about nuclear power.  Right now, America gets about one-fifth of our electricity from nuclear energy.  And it’s important to recognize that nuclear energy doesn’t emit carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.  So those of us who are concerned about climate change, we’ve got to recognize that nuclear power, if it’s safe, can make a significant contribution to the climate change question. 

And I’m determined to ensure that it’s safe.  So in light of what’s happened in Japan, I’ve requested a comprehensive safety review by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission to make sure that all of our existing nuclear energy facilities are safe.  And we’re going incorporate those conclusions and lessons from Japan in design and the building of the next generation of plants.  But we can’t simply take it off the table. 

My administration is leading global discussions towards a new international framework in which all countries who are operating nuclear plants are making sure that they’re not spreading dangerous nuclear materials and technology.

But more broadly, a clean energy standard can expand the scope of clean energy investments because what it does is it gives cutting-edge companies the certainty that they need to invest.  Essentially what it does is it says to companies, you know what, you will have a customer if you’re producing clean energy.  Utilities, they need to buy a certain amount of clean energy in their overall portfolio, and that means that innovators are willing to make those big capital investments. 

And we’ve got to start now because -- think about this -- in the 1980s, America was home to more than 80 percent of the world’s wind capacity, 90 percent of the world’s solar capacity. We were the leaders in wind.  We were the leaders in solar.  We owned the clean energy economy in the ‘80s.  Guess what.  Today, China has the most wind capacity.  Germany has the most solar capacity.  Both invest more in clean energy than we do, even though we are a larger economy and a substantially larger user of energy.  We’ve fallen behind on what is going to be the key to our future.

Other countries are now exporting technology we pioneered and they’re going after the jobs that come with it because they know that the countries that lead the 21st century clean energy economy will be the countries that lead the 21st century global economy. 

I want America to be that nation.  I want America to win the future.  (Applause.) 

So a clean energy standard will help drive private investment in innovation.  But I want to make this point:  Government funding will still be critical.  Over the past two years, the historic investments my administration has made in clean and renewable energy research and technology have helped private sector companies grow and hire hundreds of thousands of new workers. 

I’ve visited gleaming new solar arrays that are among the largest in the world.  I've tested an electric vehicle fresh off the assembly line.  I mean, I didn’t really test it -- I was able to drive like five feet before Secret Service said to stop.  (Laughter.)  I’ve toured factories that used to be shuttered, where they’re now building advanced wind blades that are as long as 747s, and they’re building the towers that support them.  And I’ve seen the scientists that are searching for the next big breakthrough in energy.  None of this would have happened without government support.

I understand we’ve got a tight fiscal situation, so it’s fair to ask how do we pay for government’s investment in energy. And as we debate our national priorities and our budget in Congress, we’re going to have to make some tough choices.  We’re going to have to cut what we don’t need to invest in what we do need. 

Unfortunately, some folks want to cut critical investments in clean energy.  They want to cut our research and development into new technologies.  They’re shortchanging the resources necessary even to promptly issue new permits for offshore drilling.  These cuts would eliminate thousands of private sector jobs; it would terminate scientists and engineers; it would end fellowships for researchers, some who may be here at Georgetown, graduate students and other talent that we desperately need to get into this area in the 21st century.  That doesn’t make sense.

We’re already paying a price for our inaction.  Every time we fill up at the pump, every time we lose a job or a business to countries that are investing more than we do in clean energy, when it comes to our air, our water, and the climate change that threatens the planet that you will inherit -– we’re already paying a price.  These are costs that we are already bearing.  And if we do nothing, the price will only go up.

So at moments like these, sacrificing these investments in research and development, in supporting clean energy technologies, that would weaken our energy economy and make us more dependent on oil.  That’s not a game plan to win the future. That’s a vision to keep us mired in the past.  I will not accept that outcome for the United States of America.  We are not going to do that.  (Applause.)

Let me close by speaking directly to the students here -- the next generation who are going to be writing the next great chapter in the American story.  The issue of energy independence is one that America has been talking about since before your parents were your age, since before you were born.  And you also happen to go to a school [in a town] that for a long time has suffered from a chronic unwillingness to come together and make tough choices.  And so I forgive you for thinking that maybe there isn’t much we can do to rise to this challenge.  Maybe some of you are feeling kind of cynical or skeptical about whether we’re actually going to solve this problem.  But everything I have seen and experienced with your generation convinces me otherwise. 

I think that precisely because you are coming of age at a time of such rapid and sometimes unsettling change, born into a world with fewer walls, educated in an era of constant information, tempered by war and economic turmoil -- because that’s the world in which you’re coming of age, I think you believe as deeply as any of our previous generations that America can change and it can change for the better. 

We need that.  We need you to dream big.  We need you to summon that same spirit of unbridled optimism and that bold willingness to tackle tough challenges and see those challenges through that led previous generations to rise to greatness -– to save a democracy, to touch the moon, to connect the world with our own science and our own imagination.

That’s what America is capable of.  That's what you have to push America to do, and it will be you that pushes it.  That history of ours, of meeting challenges -– that's your birthright. You understand that there’s no problem out there that is not within our power to solve.

I don’t want to leave this challenge for future Presidents. I don’t want to leave it for my children.  I don’t want to leave it for your children.  So, yes, solving it will take time and it will take effort.  It will require our brightest scientists, our most creative companies.  It will require all of us –- Democrats, Republicans, and everybody in between -– to do our part.  But with confidence in America and in ourselves and in one another, I know this is a challenge that we will solve.

Thank you very much, everybody.  God bless you.  God bless the United States of America.  (Applause.)
END          
12:24 P.M. EDT

Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, offers a comprehensive look at the President's energy vision and agenda.

The Nation’s primary global change research program has a new leader who will oversee these enhancements at time of great import for the global-change science community and for society as a whole.

Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, discusses a new report from the Department of the Interior on the acreage of public lands (onshore and offshore) that have been leased to oil and gas companies and remain undeveloped.

view all related blog posts

Fuente: whitehouse.gov

FACT SHEET: America's Energy Security | The White House Skip to main content | Skip to footer site map The White House. President Barack Obama Get Email UpdatesContact Us Go to homepage. The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Executive Orders Presidential Memoranda Proclamations Legislation Pending Legislation Signed Legislation Vetoed Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Visitor Access Records Financial Disclosures 2010 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff 2009 Annual Report to Congress on White House Staff Ethics Pledge Waivers Issues Civil Rights It Gets Better Defense The Way Forward in Afghanistan Disabilities Economy Financial Reform Innovation Startup America Education Educate to Innovate Higher Education Race to the Top Commencement Challenge Energy & Environment A New Foundation Deepwater BP Oil Spill Ethics Family Fiscal Responsibility Foreign Policy Japan Earthquake and Tsunami Trip to Asia 2010 Haiti Earthquake Speech in Cairo Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Poverty Rural State Fair Tour Seniors & Social Security Service Taxes Tax Cuts, Unemployment Insurance and Jobs Technology Urban Policy Veterans Women Additional Issues The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet 2010 Video Reports White House Staff Chief of Staff Bill Daley Deputy Chief of Staff Nancy-Ann DeParle Deputy Chief of Staff Alyssa Mastromonaco Counselor to the President Peter Rouse Senior Advisor Valerie Jarrett Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Interactive Tour History White House Rooms White House Art Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows President’s Commission About the Fellowship Current Class Recent Class Staff Bios White House Internships The Story About Us Program Apply Here Submit a Recommendation Tours & Events 2011 Easter Egg Roll Kitchen Garden Tours Holidays 2010 Inside the White House Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources /* Maximize height of menu features. */if(typeof(jQuery)!='undefined')jQuery.each($('.topnav-feature','#topnav'),function(i,v){var o=$(v),oh=o.height(),sh=o.siblings().height();if(oh Home • Briefing Room • Statements & Releases   table.system-status-report th, table td, table th { padding: 5px;}.item-list ul.pager {margin: 0;}.view-display-id-page_1 {padding: 20px;}.node-form .text {width:95%;}.node-form, #node-delete-confirm, #user-login {max-width:648px;}dl.node-type-list {max-width: 615px; padding: 20px; margin: 20px;}#edit-delete, div.submenu.revisions {display: none;}ul.secondary li {display: block;}ul.secondary a.active {border-bottom: 1px solid #999;} The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

For Immediate Release March 30, 2011 FACT SHEET: America's Energy Security

Rising prices at the pump affect everybody – workers and farmers; truck drivers and restaurant owners.  Businesses see it impact their bottom line.  Families feel the pinch when they fill up their tank.  For Americans already struggling to get by, it makes life that much harder.  That’s why we need to make ourselves more secure and control our energy future by harnessing all of the resources that we have available and embracing a diverse energy portfolio. With an ultimate goal of reducing our dependence on oil, in the near term we must responsibly develop and produce oil and gas at home, while at the same time leveraging cleaner, alternative fuels and increasing efficiency.  And beyond our efforts to reduce our dependence on oil, we must focus on expanding cleaner sources of electricity – keeping America on the cutting edge of clean energy technology so that we can build a 21st century clean energy economy and win the future.

Reducing oil imports

In 2008, America imported 11 million barrels of oil a day.  By 2025 – a little over a decade from now – we will have cut that by one-third.

Expanding Safe and Responsible Domestic Oil and Gas Development and Production:Implementing critical safety reforms:  In response to the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico, the Obama Administration has launched rigorous and comprehensive environmental and safety reforms to ensure the responsible development of offshore oil and gas resourceIdentifying underdeveloped resources:  The President asked the Department of the Interior (DOI) to issue a report on the status of unused oil and gas leases.  That report showed that 57 percent of all leased onshore acres and 70 percent of offshore leased acres are inactive – meaning that they are neither being explored or developed.Developing incentives for expedited development and production: DOI is developing incentives for expedited development of oil and gas production from existing and future leases.  For its offshore leasing program, the DOI has already begun to employ incentives, including the shortening of some lease terms to encourage earlier development, and requiring drilling to begin before an extension can be granted on a lease.  DOI is also evaluating the potential use of graduated royalty rate structures, such as those adopted by the State of Texas, to encourage more rapid production.Securing Access to Diverse and Reliable Sources of Energy:  The U.S. is acting in the international arena to moderate global oil demand and secure additional supplies of liquid fuels and clean energy.  We are working with our international partners to increase natural gas supplies, replace oil with natural gas in power generation, and increase responsible oil production in a manner that ensures safety .  We are also increasing sustainable bioenergy production, building a new international framework for nuclear energy, and promoting energy efficiency.  Developing Alternatives to Oil, Including Biofuels and Natural Gas:  Some of our most effective opportunities to enhance our energy security can be found in our own backyard.  We are committed to finding better and smarter ways to use these abundant energy resources. That means:Expanding biofuels markets and commercializing new biofuels technologies:  Corn ethanol is already making a significant contribution to reducing our oil dependence, but increasing market share will require overcoming infrastructure challenges and commercializing promising cellulosic and advanced biofuels technologies.  To help achieve this goal, the Administration has set a goal of breaking ground on at least four commercial-scale cellulosic or advanced bio-refineries over the next two years. And as we do all of these things, we will look for ways to reform our biofuels incentives to make sure they meet today’s biofuels challenges and save taxpayers money.  Encouraging responsible development practices for natural gas:  The Administration is committed to the use of this important domestic resource, but we must ensure it is developed safely and responsibly. To that end the Administration is focused on increasing transparency about the use of fracking chemicals, working with state regulators to offer technical assistance, and launching a new initiative to tap experts in industry, the environmental community and states to develop recommendations for shale extraction practices that will ensure the protection of public health and the environment. Cutting Costs at the Pump with More Efficient Cars and Trucks:   The Administration is building on recent investments in advanced vehicles, fuel, technologies, high speed rail, and public transit:Setting historic new fuel economy standards: Standards for model years 2012-16 will raise average fuel economy to 35.5 miles per gallon by 2016, and save 1.8 billion barrels of oil over the lifetime of the vehicles covered. In July, the Administration will also finalize the first-ever national fuel economy and greenhouse gas emission standards for commercial trucks, vans and buses built in 2014 - 2018.  These standards will cut oil use and promote the development and deployment of alternative fuels, including natural gas.  The Administration is also developing the next generation of fuel economy and greenhouse gas emission standards for passenger vehicles 2017-2025 and expects to announce the proposal in September 2011.Paving the way for advanced vehicles:  The President has set an ambitious goal of putting 1 million electric vehicles on the road by 2015.  To help us get there, the President’s FY 2012 Budget proposes a redesigned $7500 tax credit for consumers, competitive grants for communities that encourage the adoption of electric vehicles, and funding for R&D to drive innovation in advanced battery technology.  At the same time, the President is calling on Congress to move forward with policies that can help unlock the promise of natural gas vehicles.Leading by Example With the Federal Fleet.  The Federal government operates more than 600,000 fleet vehicles.   We have already doubled the number of hybrid vehicles in the federal fleet.  Today, the President is calling for administrative action directing agencies to ensure that by 2015, all new vehicles they purchase will be alternative-fuel vehicles, including hybrid and electric vehicles. 

Innovating Our Way to a Clean Energy Future 

Charting a path  towards cleaner sources of electricity and greater energy efficiency, and remaining on the cutting edge of clean energy technology.

Creating Markets for Clean Energy:  To move capital off of the sidelines and into the clean energy economy – creating jobs in the process – we need to give businesses and entrepreneurs a clear signal that there will be a market for clean energy innovation.  That’s why the Administration is committed to pursuing a Clean Energy Standard (CES), an ambitious but achievable goal of generating 80 percent of the Nation’s electricity from clean energy sources by 2035 – including renewable energy sources like wind, solar, biomass, and hydropower; nuclear power; efficient natural gas; and clean coal.Cutting Energy Bills through More Efficient Homes and Buildings: Our homes, businesses and factories consume over 70 percent of the energy we use.  By making smart investments in energy efficiency in the residential, commercial, and industrial sectors, we can improve U.S. competitiveness and protect our environment, while saving consumers money on electricity bills.  That is why the Administration is on track to weatherize 600,000 low-income homes through Recovery Act investments, and why we remain committed to a series of policies that increase efficiency across sectors – including a HOMESTAR program to help homeowners finance retrofits, a “Better Buildings Initiative” to make commercial facilities 20 percent more efficient by 2020, and steps to promote industrial energy efficiency.Staying on the Cutting Edge through Clean Energy Research and Development:  Through the Advanced Research Project Agency-Energy (ARPA-E) program, we have invested in over 100 cutting-edge projects in areas ranging from smart grid technology, to carbon capture, to battery technology for electric vehicles. Past Budgets funded three “Energy Innovation Hubs” that explore building efficiency, fuel from sunlight, and nuclear reactor modeling and simulation.  The FY 2012 Budget request more than doubles funding for ARPA-E and doubles the number of Hubs to include new Hubs that will advance smart grid technology, critical materials research, as well as batteries and energy storage. 

 

Blog posts on this issue March 29, 2011 5:24 PM EDTStrengthening Our Understanding of a Changing Planet

The Nation’s primary global change research program has a new leader who will oversee these enhancements at time of great import for the global-change science community and for society as a whole.

March 29, 2011 1:38 PM EDTThe Results Are In: Drilling Down On Unused Leases

Heather Zichal, Deputy Assistant to the President for Energy and Climate Change, discusses a new report from the Department of the Interior on the acreage of public lands (onshore and offshore) that have been leased to oil and gas companies and remain undeveloped.

March 29, 2011 12:21 PM EDTAmerica's Next Top Energy Innovator

The Department of Energy is launching a competitive process for recognizing entrepreneurs who are at the cutting edge of clean energy technology. Submissions will be accepted starting in May.

view all related blog posts ul.related-content li.views-row img {float: left; padding: 5px 10px 0 0;} Stay ConnectedFacebookTwitterFlickrMySpaceYouTubeVimeoiTunesLinkedIn   Home The White House Blog Photos & Videos Photo Galleries Video Live Streams Podcasts Briefing Room Your Weekly Address Speeches & Remarks Press Briefings Statements & Releases White House Schedule Presidential Actions Legislation Nominations & Appointments Disclosures Issues Civil Rights Defense Disabilities Economy Education Energy & Environment Ethics Family Fiscal Responsibility Foreign Policy Health Care Homeland Security Immigration Poverty Rural Seniors & Social Security Service Taxes Technology Urban Policy Veterans Women Additional Issues The Administration President Barack Obama Vice President Joe Biden First Lady Michelle Obama Dr. Jill Biden The Cabinet White House Staff Executive Office of the President Other Advisory Boards About the White House Interactive Tour History Presidents First Ladies The Oval Office The Vice President's Residence & Office Eisenhower Executive Office Building Camp David Air Force One White House Fellows White House Internships Tours & Events Inside the White House Our Government The Executive Branch The Legislative Branch The Judicial Branch The Constitution Federal Agencies & Commissions Elections & Voting State & Local Government Resources En español Accessibility Copyright Information Privacy Policy Contact USA.gov Subscribe to RSS Feeds Apply for a Job

Fuente: whitehouse.gov

The White House

Office of the Press Secretary

James S. Brady Press Briefing Room

Please see below for a correction (marked with asterisks) to the transcript.

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN:  Thank you, Mr. Chairman.  Thank you, Jay. 

We have been working very closely with our colleagues throughout the interagency process here at the Department of Energy.  We've been ***led by Secretary Chu -- I just came from speaking with him on this matter and we've been speaking continuously throughout the weekend.

1:07 P.M. EDT

MR. CARNEY: Good afternoon, everyone. Over the weekend, as you know, the President was briefed multiple times on the situation in Japan in the wake of the tragic earthquake and tsunami there. USAID is leading our humanitarian assistance effort with the Department of Energy, the Department of Health and Human Services, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission and others.

Here at the White House, Homeland Security Advisor John Brennan is coordinating an interagency process with regards to Japan and engaging with relevant officials from across the government. Because we knew that you would have a lot of questions about the situation in Japan, especially with regard to nuclear issues, I brought with me today, asked to come today, Greg JACZKO, who is the chairman of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. He can answer questions people have about the safety of American citizens in Japan, as well as he can just generally update Americans about the impact of the accident -- or rather the aftermath of the tsunami and earthquake.

And then I also have Dan Poneman, who is our Deputy Secretary of Energy, and he can outline everything that we are doing to assist Japan as it deals with the aftermath.

With that, I'll ask these two gentlemen to speak. If you could address the questions related to their areas to them, and then we'll let them get out of here and get back to work. And I will take questions on other issues. Thanks very much.

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: If I could just start with just a few points. First and foremost, based on the type of reactor design and the nature of the accident we see a very low likelihood, really a very low probability that there’s any possibility of harmful radiation levels in the United States or in Hawaii, or in any other U.S. territories.

Right now, based on the information we have, we believe that the steps that the Japanese are taking to respond to this crisis are consistent with the approach that we would use here in the United States. And most importantly, we advise Americans in Japan to listen to and to follow the instructions of the Japanese government with regard to the nuclear facilities.

The agency has been providing technical assistance to the Japanese government as they are requesting, and in particular, we have dispatched two technical experts to Japan and are continuing to assemble a team of experts that would be dispatched in the near future.

So with that, I will then turn to Dan.

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Jay.

We have been working very closely with our colleagues throughout the interagency process here at the Department of Energy. We've been by Secretary Chu -- I just came from speaking with him on this matter and we've been speaking continuously throughout the weekend. John Brennan has been coordinating matters interagency. We have had frequent meetings in person, we've had frequent meetings over the telephone, as we are trying to respond to all of the data that we are taking in.

We've also been in very, very close, continuous consultation, all hours of the day, with Ambassador John Roos -- and hats off to him for the incredible job he and the country team have been doing as they’ve been coordinating the American response. And as appropriate, given their independent regulatory status, we're making sure we share information as appropriate with Chairman JACZKO and our colleagues over at the NRC.

We have focused our efforts on consulting very, very closely with our Japanese colleagues. We also have dispatched subject matter experts -- both reactor experts and an expert on emergency response. We are in consultation with them and we will make sure that any requirement that they have we are prepared to meet. And we are talking with them even on a real-time basis as that proceeds. So we have technical expertise already there on the ground. We have additional capabilities if and as needed. Of course, the Japanese government has tremendous capabilities on their own, but because a matter of this nature requires all of our best efforts, we stand ready to assist as required.

MR. CARNEY: What I'll do is I'll go ahead and call on people. Ben, why don't you start?

Q Thank you. Chairman Jaczko, can you give us a sense of how President Obama is getting briefed about this nuclear crisis in Japan and the risk to the people there? And also, in the plainest terms you can, can you describe sort of the nature of what we’re seeing and just how bad it is?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Well, I would turn to one of the others about the President’s briefings.

MR. CARNEY: Let me just say, Ben, if I could, the President was briefed multiple times over the weekend. He has been briefed this morning and is being updated throughout the day. John Brennan, the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, is taking a lead on that and gathering information and coordinating the briefings the President gets with all the relevant officials in the government.

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: It terms of the second part of your question, it is a serious situation certainly in Japan. The efforts right now of the Japanese government, with our assistance where they’ve requested it, is to continue to look for ways to provide the ability to keep the reactors cool. And that is a process that has been ongoing now for some time, and we continue to provide assistance where we can. In particular, they have asked for additional types of equipment that will help provide water and other resources to ensure that the reactors continue to be cool.

Q Has there been a partial meltdown in any of these reactors there?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: At this time, we don’t really have detailed information about the nature of the core in the reactor itself. But it is a situation in which there has been a loss of the normal type of cooling mechanisms to the reactor. So as the situation continues to develop we’ll get better information. But right now, the focus has been to do everything possible to ensure that the reactor continues to be cooled.

Q And this incident leading to any safety concerns at nuclear facilities here in the United States?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Well, as I said, from the NRC’s perspective, we are always focused on the safety and security of nuclear power plants in this country. That will always be something that we do. Whenever there’s any new information, we always take that information into consideration and make changes if necessary. But right now we continue to believe that nuclear power plants in this country operate safely and securely.

I’ll stop at that point.

MR. CARNEY: Jill.

Q Following up on that, is there any attempt, though, at this stage to assess, carry out a study of the ability of these plants in the United States to withstand an earthquake? Because after all, you have California. And also at least one of the reactors in jeopardy apparently in Japan uses that MOX fuel. Is there more concern about that, heightened -- any situation with the venting?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Well, with regard to the U.S. power plants, the U.S. power plants are designed to very high standards for earthquake effects. All our plants are designed to withstand significant natural phenomena like earthquakes, tornadoes and tsunamis. So we believe we have a very solid and strong regulatory infrastructure in place right now. But of course, as we always do, as an independent regulatory agency, we will continue to take new information and see if there are changes that we need to make with our program.

With regard to the MOX fuel, again, we are providing assistance to the Japanese where they request our assistance. And at this time, they have not asked for any specific information with regard to the MOX fuel.

Q You just talked about how the high standards are here in the United States domestically. What are the differences in safety standards between what Japan has and what the United States does have?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Well, right now as I said, our focus is always on keeping the nuclear power plants in this country secure. We are also putting a strong focus right now on providing technical expertise to the Japanese as they request it. Questions about exactly the differences and what changes we might want to consider and look at in this country is something we’ll deal with down the road. But bottom line right now, we believe that the plants in this country continue to be designed to a very high standard for seismic and tsunami-type events.

Q There’s already been calls -- this might be more for Jay, but there are already calls for moratoriums in the United States. For example, Congressman Markey called for that. Does the President know about these calls for changes in U.S. handling of this issue? And you said you were reviewing, but what is the timeline for that? This is obviously something that Americans are concerned about.

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Again, as an independent regulatory agency, we will always take whatever steps are necessary to ensure the safety and security of nuclear power plants in this country. But right now we believe we have a very strong program in place. As we get more information from Japan, as this immediate crisis ultimately comes to an end, we will look at whatever information we can gain from this event and see if there are changes we need to make to our system.

I would just add as a similar scenario, following the 2004 tsunami, we did review tsunami requirements for nuclear power plants, and, in fact, went and made sure that our plants would be able do deal with that type of event.

MR. CARNEY: Chip.

Q Would plants in the United States be able to withstand a quake of this magnitude?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Again, I don’t want to speculate on anything like that at this point.

Q But are they planned to be able to -- I know they try to estimate what they would be able to withstand. I know in Japan, for example, this one I believe was only built to withstand a 7.9 or something like that. In the United States, are they built to withstand a quake of this magnitude, of an 8.9?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: At this point what I can say is we have a strong safety program in place to deal with seismic events that are likely to happen at any nuclear facility in this country. As we get past this immediate crisis where we continue to provide support to the Japanese, we’ll gather information about the specifics of the event. But I don’t want to speculate too much about what exactly were the relevant factors in Japan at this point.

Q And one other question. You said that there’s a “very low likelihood,” I believe were your words, of harmful radiation making it to Hawaii or the West Coast. Is that based on the condition of those plants right now, or is that based on a partial meltdown or, heaven forbid, a total meltdown? Could that change your assessment?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: The information about harmful -- the lack of any harmful impacts to the U.S. is simply based on the nature of these reactors and the large distances, obviously, between those and any U.S. territory. So you just aren’t going to have any radiological material that by the time it traveled those large distances could present any risk to the American public.

Q Even in a worst-case scenario, even with a meltdown, you’re not going to have harmful radiation reach Hawaii or the West Coast?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Again, I don’t want to speculate on various scenarios, but based on the design and the distances involved, it is very unlikely that there would be any harmful impacts.

MR. CARNEY: Mike.

Q Do you gentlemen worry about perhaps an overreaction in this country, seeing a nuclear problem in another country, in terms of policymakers running away from nuclear energy?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: I would defer to Dan.

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: I think you just heard very clearly from Chairman Jaczko that we place safety paramount when it comes to the regulation of our nuclear power plants, and we always will. That having been said, we have to have an energy policy and a direction in this country that’s driven by our overall assessment of our country’s best interest.

In that respect, we are going to continue to seek to diversify our energy supplies. We’re going to continue to make sure that each and every one of those sources is as safe as is humanly possible. And we will continue to take all learnings into account as we proceed from episodes that happened, from hypothetical that we might be able to come up with. It’s a matter -- it’s nothing new about it. It’s a matter of our continuous approach to our own development of our safety resources -- our energy resources to make sure that they’re done continuously and safely. Each event as it occurs is taken into account, but we don’t sort of change from day to day our overall approach to the desire to diversify our overall energy posture.

Q And nuclear is a key component in your interest in diversification, correct?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: Nuclear power has been a critical component to the U.S. energy portfolio. We have 104 operating reactors -- that’s 20 percent of the electricity of this country; 70 percent of the carbon-free electricity in this country comes from nuclear power. So we do see nuclear power as continuing to play an important role in building a low-carbon future. But be assured that we will take the safety aspect of that as our paramount concern.

And under the independent regulatory authority, going back to 1974, the NRC, which is independent and is, therefore, at arms’ length, will ensure that we live up to exactly those kinds of high standards that the President expects us to use in operating those plants.

Q And quickly, it is critical to reaching your mission goals, correct -- nuclear energy?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: We view nuclear energy as a very important component to the overall portfolio we’re trying to build for a clean energy future.

Q I want to follow up on a question and see if we can get Jay to answer on this -- the moratoria issue. I think it was Senator Lieberman said over the weekend that what’s gone on in Japan should cause us to put the brakes for the moment on nuclear power plant development in America. Does the administration agree with that?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: I’m happy to start and others can supplement.

As I said, going back decades, every experience that we have with respect to our nuclear plants we take fully into account. Certainly back in March 1979 at the time of the Three Mile Island episode, there were a tremendous amount of learnings that we applied to the improvement of safety in our fleet. Our reactors are much safer today because of all those learnings that have been applied.

We continually hypothesize new scenarios of different types and never stop our efforts to continue to exercise our capabilities, to assess the possibilities, and to ensure that our reactors can operate as safely as possible. We’ll continue to do that. We’ll continue to seek to improve. We’ll certainly take the learnings out of this experience and apply those as well. And we know, because of the independence of the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, that in terms of operating our reactors only if they can operated safely, that is a responsibility that is properly reposed in the Nuclear Regulatory Commission.

Q So a pause isn’t necessary?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: From a policy perspective, we will continue to operate our reactors and seek to operate them safely. We will continue to seek to build nuclear into a part of a responsible energy future, and we will repose our confidence in the NRC to make sure that we only do so to the extent that it can be done safely.

MR. CARNEY: Athena, I would just add that we have the plants that we have already in operation that provide 20 percent of the electricity in the United States. And information is still coming in from Japan, so as we evaluate that information, these gentlemen have made clear that they will incorporate that into how we view safety and security of nuclear energy as a resource.

But it remains a part of the President’s overall energy plan when he talks about reaching a clean energy standard it’s a vital part of that. And as we get more information about Japan and what happened there, that can be incorporated. But right now, we remain committed to the clean energy standard and the other aspects of the President’s energy plan.

Q Mr. Chairman, do you have NRC people in Japan now?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: We currently have two NRC technical experts in Japan. They are working to provide information to the U.S. embassy, as well as to interface with their colleagues in the Japan regulatory authority.

Q And from your understanding of the situation now with the Japanese reactors, is it as bad as it’s going to get, or might it get worse?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Again, I don’t want to speculate on how this may progress. I would say it is a serious situation, and we continue to provide whatever assistance is requested from us and is necessary -- assistance requested or necessary by the Japanese government. And I would it is a -- Japan is a technically advanced nuclear country and they possess significant technical resources and capability on their own.

Q Jay, so there’s nothing -- the President hasn’t seen anything in Japan that will lead him to change his position that the U.S. should continue to get power from nuclear sources and increase that amount in the future?

MR. CARNEY: Dan, from a policy point of view -- but again, this is a -- information is still coming in. I think these gentlemen have addressed the issues of safety and security of the American nuclear energy program. And as more information comes in, obviously it will be evaluated. But 20 percent of our electricity is generated by nuclear power. It is already a major component of our energy here I in the United States.

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: If I could add, just again to reiterate I think the point that’s been made, that we are an independent regulatory authority and we always keep focus on a day-to-day basis on the safety and security of nuclear reactors in this country. So if we do get information that would cause us to take action, we will take that action. But at this time, we don’t have any information that would cause us to do anything different with our approach with the current reactors. But we will review information as it becomes available.

MR. CARNEY: A couple of more.

Q Mr. Chairman, of those two technical advisors you have there, are they in Tokyo? Are they up near the facility? Are they getting information from the Japanese government? And how would you describe the Japanese government’s description of what’s going on? Are they being forthcoming with both the public and with you?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Well, our two experts are in Tokyo and they are providing assistance to both the U.S. embassy as well an interface with our Japanese counterparts. And we continue to work to provide resources and assistance as we can.

Q Are they getting information, technical information from the Japanese? Are they watching press reports about what they’re seeing going on? To what extent are they really hearing what’s going on?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Right now, they’re providing a very valuable resource to us to give us direct information from Japan about what’s going on. And that’s coming from a variety of sources, including interaction with counterparts in their regulatory --

Q Has the government of Japan been very cautious about what it’s putting out publicly? They didn’t have much urgency at the beginning and it’s gotten more and more urgent.

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Again, from what I’ve seen, we continue to see a very aggressive effort to deal with what is a very difficult situation in Japan right now.

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: Can I just supplement that by saying that we’ve been in consultation through Ambassador Roos. He’s been in continuous consultation with Chief Cabinet Secretary Edano. And we have two subject matter experts over there as well, and they are in communication with their counterparts.

Q Have you supplied any actual equipment to the Japanese? Have they requested anything?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: Well, we are ready to provide equipment. We have talked to them about what they have. As of this morning, there may be some additional information that Chairman Jaczko may wish to comment on. But what we are making sure of is, A, of course they have a lot of equipment on their own, but, B, such equipment as we have -- and we have equipment that can do aerial monitoring of ground deposition -- that’s available. We have emergency response equipment. That’s available. We’re not starting from a blank slate, though, because the Japanese already have a lot of equipment, and we’re just making sure we’ve got what we need to supplement.

MR. CARNEY: Why don’t we -- one question from the Japanese media and then we’ll wrap this part up.

Q With the accident at the nuclear plant over the weekend, has there been any direct impact from that on the U.S. support teams that are already in the area? Have they had to alter their plans at all as a result?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: I would defer that question to AID, I believe. They have better information about the teams. The two NRC officials who are in Tokyo have not experienced any issues that I’m aware of. But, obviously, their safety -- their personal safety is important to us. But in Tokyo, there is no direct impact from the nuclear incident itself.

Q Can you talk then more generally about the logistical challenges of going into an area with such unprecedented damage?

CHAIRMAN JACZKO: Again, I would defer some of those broader questions to the folks at AID that we’ve been working with very closely to help provide that logistical support.

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: I would just add to that, our DOE people have not been impaired in their ability to reach out to their Japanese counterparts. And in fact, at the Ambassador’s request, we’re sending another technical expert to join the team so they’ve got more subject matter expertise there.

In the context of the coordination that Mr. Brennan has been doing from the homeland perspective, we are making sure and working very closely with our colleagues in the Pentagon to make sure that any assets from a U.S. government perspective that need to be brought in there, we make available whatever assets we have through them, working with AID, as well.

Q Can I ask about nuclear waste, please? It’s very important.

MR. CARNEY: I want to let these guys go for now.

Q Can we ask you about it?

MR. CARNEY: We’ll take one question on nuclear waste, Connie.

Q Thank you. Is the U.S. reviewing its policy now on nuclear waste? And what are the Japanese doing in the midst of this crisis with their nuclear waste?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: I would segregate what they're doing in the middle of this crisis with respect to their nuclear waste. The first focus in the crisis, obviously, is getting the coolant to the cores of the affected reactors. And of course, there is spent fuel present at the reactors and making sure that that used fuel remains cooled properly and so forth.

From a U.S. perspective, we are still very closely evaluating our options. And the principal mechanism here, as you well know, is that President Obama asked Secretary Chu to convene a high-level panel of very distinguished Americans, chaired by Mr. Lee Hamilton, former congressman, and retired general Brent Scowcroft. And that group is going to be looking at all the options having to do with the back end of the fuel cycle for the United States of America, and by July will be coming back with some interim views on the options we ought to think about going forward. I’m sure they're going to be taking all of these experiences, data coming out of this experience into account.

Q Are you confident that Japanese nuclear waste is safe now?

DEPUTY SECRETARY PONEMAN: In terms of Japanese regulation of Japanese nuclear waste, I would refer you to the Japanese regulatory authorities.

MR. CARNEY: Thank you, gentlemen, very much. I appreciate it. We’ll move on to the rest of the briefing. Thank you for coming.

Thanks for holding in abeyance your questions on other issues. Ben.

Q Two quick ones, Jay. I know that the President’s concern first and foremost is about health and safety as it relates to this disaster. But is he also concerned about the impact the Japan natural disaster could have on the world economy?

MR. CARNEY: Ben, we have full confidence in the capacity of Japan to address the economic challenges during these exceptionally difficult times. We’re monitoring, as we do always, the global economic environment, but we stand ready to assist the Japanese who are our friends and allies in any way that we can. And it’s important to remember that the Japanese have demonstrated a great resiliency and ability to pull together during times of adversity, and we are confident that they will overcome this challenge and recover from this tragedy.

Q And on one other topic, on the meeting that the President is having with General Petraeus, could you just tell us a bit about why he’s here? And specifically, is this a meeting at which he -- the General plans to talk about troop withdrawal plans in Afghanistan?

MR. CARNEY: Well, the General, as you know, is here. He is testifying on the Hill this week, and he is here meeting with the President today -- well, they meet with some regularity -- but to brief him on the progress we’re making in Afghanistan. And as part of that discussion, yes, I believe they will discuss the President’s plan to being a transition process in July of 2011, which will begin a process that will lead to turning over the security lead to the Afghan security forces by the end of 2014.

Q Jay, I saw the statement this morning about Bahrain and Saudi Arabia and the other GCC countries, but if this is the case that you have Saudi Arabia sending its forces into Bahrain, isn’t that a gross violation of the sovereignty of another country?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we’re aware of those reports and that other GCC countries are considering doing that. We urge all of our GCC partners to show restraint and to respect the rights of the people of Bahrain, and to act in a way that supports dialogue instead of undermining it. The important factor here is that our overall principles apply to Bahrain and all the countries in the region, which is that we urge restraint. We urge nonviolence in response to nonviolent protesters; the respect for the universal rights of people in the region to gather peacefully, to voice their opinions, to have their grievances heard by their governments, and to have greater participation in the political process.

We have long believed and the President has expressed for a long time now that stability in the region will be brought about by dialogue and political reform. And it is counterproductive to that goal to in any way repress the expression of those desires that the people of Bahrain, in this case, and other countries, have.

Q Jay, that’s a very diplomatic way of saying that the U.S. is unhappy about what’s going on. But if another country, if Iran had decided to go into another country because they felt it was the right thing to do, what would the United States be saying? And I know it’s a hypothetical, but this appears to be pretty serious.

MR. CARNEY: Well, again, I think you have to understand what -- I mean, we’ve seen the reports that you’re talking about. This is not an invasion of a country.

Q Right, but there are security forces.

MR. CARNEY: It is -- correct. And we urge the government of Bahrain, as we have repeatedly, as well as other GCC countries to exercise restraint, and not to meet the nonviolent protests of people legitimately expressing their concerns and asking to have their voices heard with any kind of physical violence. So we -- that -- we call on, again, the government of Bahrain as well as other countries in the region that -- to hear this message.

Steve.

Q Did you get any advance warning that this was going to happen, the Saudis moving in?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have anything on that for you, Steve. As far as --

Q As far as you know -- okay.

MR. CARNEY: I don’t know. I don’t have anything for you on that.

Q Are we calling on the Saudis to leave?

MR. CARNEY: We are calling on the Saudis, the other members of the GCC countries, as well as the Bahraini government, to show restraint; and that we believe that political dialogue is the way to address the unrest that has occurred in the region, in Bahrain and in other countries, and not to in any way suppress it.

Yes.

Q Over the weekend you sent out a statement responding to the Arab League’s endorsement of a no-fly zone, but you didn’t obviously indicate whether the United States supports that or not. Knowing that all options are still on the table, isn’t it approaching a situation where it might be too little, too late, in Libya to enact this no-fly zone?

MR. CARNEY: As you know, we have discussions going on at the United Nations in New York regarding various options, military options, as well as non-military, and specifically a no-fly zone option. We have, as you know, tomorrow and then Wednesday at NATO, a process by which the plans that were being reviewed and refined that address a no-fly option will be presented to the NAC on Wednesday. And so we are, as we have said, constantly reviewing our options, refining our options, and this process is moving along.

The situation in Libya -- we continue to condemn the use of violence against the Libyan people by the Qaddafi regime, and we are encouraged by the international condemnation of that and by the actions taken by the Arab League, for example, because we believe that whatever actions we do take should be international and especially should represent the will of the people in the region and the countries in the region. And that’s why the Arab League’s voice on this is so important.

Q Knowing that you are -- could potentially be -- could be moving forward on this this week, but doesn’t that -- there’s been some voiced concern from foreign counterparts that that might nullify the goal of a no-fly zone, to enact it a little too late. Is there no concern --

MR. CARNEY: Well, Sunlen, again, I would say that the -- to go back to things we’ve talked about last week, the speed of the international reaction here has been quite remarkable and we are not letting up on our pressure, as the President made clear on Friday. I would note that, as you probably know, Secretary Clinton is in Paris where she will meet with opposition leaders, Libyan opposition leaders, as well as G8 counterparts to discuss some of these issues.

So we are moving with a great deal of haste and in coordination with our international partners, again with the kind of deliberation and speed that the situation requires, mindful of the fact that the decisions we’re talking about here are significant ones and need to be made with everyone’s eyes open to what they mean and what the goals are -- and I mean that with regard to a variety of possible options.

Chip.

Q Jay, following up on the no-fly zone, my understanding is there are now about five ships off the coast of Libya, three U.S. submarines off the coast, presumably with cruise missiles, plus you’ve got plenty of NATO aircraft at bases in the vicinity. Is the hardware now in place where if the President and other leaders were to give the order, that they could pull the trigger on a no-fly zone right now?

MR. CARNEY: Chip, what I would say, first of all, for the technical requirements to impose a no-fly zone, I would refer you to NATO, to the Defense Department. But what I think Secretary Gates has made clear and others have made clear is that this has never been a case about what our capabilities are. Obviously the United States of America has the capacity with its international partners to engage -- activate a no-fly zone, as well as take a variety of other potential measures.

The issue is making sure that the policy decisions we make, we make collectively with our international partners, because it is very important that the response be an international one and not just an American one, and that we are cognizant of what the goals are and whether they’re achievable, and what the impacts of that decision will be.

Q But there’s no big lag period? If they decide Tuesday, Wednesday to --

MR. CARNEY: Again, I don’t have specifics on what technical requirements have to be met in order to begin to implement an option like that. I would refer you to NATO probably for that.

Q Just one more question. Following up on Ben’s when he asked you about the global economic impact here, you basically responded with your confidence in the resiliency of Japan. But even if Japan does respond as well as could possibly be expected, this could still have a significant effect on the global economy. In discussions back there that you’ve been a part of or are aware of, have you heard economic advisors for the administration suggest that what could happen here is the same thing that happened last year with the Greek crisis, delaying the economic recovery? Could this have that same kind of effect on the economic recovery again?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I would just say, Chip, that these are still early days, but that we remain confident that Japan and, therefore, the world can deal with this crisis and respond and rebuild in a way that is good for Japan and good for the world. So we have that confidence and we therefore believe that -- the resiliency of the Japanese people, the resiliency of the Japanese economy are very important factors in the capacity of Japan to handle this, and therefore the world working with Japan to handle it as well.

Q The recovery is safe?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I would just refer you to what I said.

Q A quick one on the gun laws. President Obama wrote an op-ed over the weekend and he said, “None of us should be willing to remain passive in the face of violence or resigned to watching helplessly as another rampage unfolds on television.” So the question is what is the administration prepared to do actively, to actively support legislation-wise? For instance, Representative McCarthy’s bill to ban high-round magazines -- is that something that the President or administration officials will come out in support for?

MR. CARNEY: Well, what I’ve said in the past still holds, which we will review proposed legislation as it comes up. I don’t have any announcements for what we would support. But I would also say that the Department of Justice has reached out to stakeholders on all sides of this issue and they’re going to be holding a series of discussions as a first step, and that some of those meetings are happening this week.

So we are -- the President made his views known in the op-ed that you referred to. And the Department of Justice is continuing this process by meeting with stakeholders on all sides of the issue to look at ways that we can find common ground to take some common-sense measures that respect Americans’ Second Amendment rights, but also deal in a common-sense way with Americans’ safety and security.

Q So the administration wouldn’t put forth legislation on its own or spearhead a plan?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I don’t want to speculate about what we may or may not do legislatively, except to say that we are engaged in this process.

Yes, Carol.

Q Sort of on what Chip was talking about, is there -- how much aid is the United States willing to give to Japan? And have there been discussions in the administration about financial assistance and what that amount might look like? Have the Japanese made any specific requests?

MR. CARNEY: I think we are now in the phase of dealing with the immediate crisis, and we are offering any and all assistance that we can provide that the Japanese request and need to help them deal with it. They are a very close ally and we stand ready to assist them in any way that we can. Long term, obviously, we’ll have to evaluate what the needs are and how we can help. But we’re committed to helping Japan recover from this.

Q Have there been any discussions about that internally, in terms of what --

MR. CARNEY: Not that I’m aware of, because we are literally dealing with the aftermath, the considerable aftermath of a terrible situation caused by this earthquake and tsunami.

Q Just one quick thing on education -- and obviously that’s an area where the White House sees room for compromise and bipartisanship -- would you consider Race to the Top an area where you have consensus? Or is that an area where the White House thinks that they might need to do some work in order to get consensus?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we are consulting with our partners on Capitol Hill of both parties on education reform regularly. And Race to the Top already has received a great deal of bipartisan support. We think it’s been a very effective program and a good model for education reform. And we expect that bipartisan support to continue -- which doesn’t mean we take it for granted. And in the process of improving the law, we’ll be working with Republicans and Democrats going forward, but we do expect it to happen this year.

Yes, sir.

Q Jay, on a funding bill, does it look to the White House as though you will get a three-week extension before the end of the week?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t want to put timing on it, Mark. But we -- the cuts that have been outlined in that temporary measure are ones that we have already identified as acceptable. So we believe that we should be able to get something done. But again, we are focused on the process of achieving a resolution for the full fiscal year. Those conversations and negotiations are ongoing and that is our primary focus.

As the President said on Friday, because of the time it took to allow the process in the Senate to take place where the Senate voted on the Republican measure that emerged from the House and the Senate Democratic measure, it became necessary to give us the breathing space to negotiate the final CR for the fiscal year. But that remains our focus. And we remain absolutely committed to the idea that we need to get this done, last year’s business done as soon as possible so we can focus on some of these other big challenges that we face.

Q And Vice President Biden will be taking the lead on that now that he’s back from Europe?

MR. CARNEY: Well, this is a team effort. Vice President Biden is back from his trip and I’m sure he will be very much engaged in that process going forward.

Peter.

Q Thank you, Jay. If the U.S. wants -- believes that the legitimate grievances of Bahraini people need to be met, why not call upon Saudi forces to withdraw?

MR. CARNEY: Peter, I don’t have anything more for you on that. We are calling on the countries in the region to show restraint and pointing to the fact that the dialogue that can bring about political reform is essential for the stability of the countries in the region and their continued economic prosperity. Because we believe, as the President has said going back to his speech in Cairo, that it is -- the unrest that we have seen is a result of the lack of dialogue and the lack of engagement with the peoples in the region in their governments and in the political process.

Q And also, you mentioned in Egypt that the -- Mubarak was on this wrong side of history. Is that Bahraini monarchy also on the wrong side of history?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we have called on the Bahraini government to -- as we have others in the region -- to have a dialogue with their people, to listen to their grievances, to adopt political reforms, to respect the universal rights of their people. And I think, broadly speaking, in the countries of the region, the leaders in the region will be judged by how they deal with this process. And we think it’s important for the future of the region, for the peoples in these countries, that their voices be heard and their legitimate aspirations be addressed.

April.

Q Going back to the op-ed of President Obama on gun control -- the President talked about the mental competency of the gunman in Arizona, how he could not get into the U.S. military, how he could not get into a college, but yet he still purchased a gun. Is that President looking at any -- what kind of ways does the President want there to be issues of judging mental competency in purchasing a gun? Or is that something that he’s looking for in anything -- any gun control measures that come along?

MR. CARNEY: That level of specificity, I don’t have, April. But I think that his point that he’s making is that we can honor our Second Amendment rights while still ensuring that, as you noted, that someone with a criminal record shouldn’t be able to check out a gun seller; that an unbalanced man shouldn’t be able to buy a gun so easily. I mean, there is room for us to have reasonable laws that uphold liberty, ensure citizen safety, respect the Second Amendment, and that we should be able to find some common ground on some of those measures. I don’t want to detail what those measures are or what he has in mind, specifically. The conversations are beginning along those lines at the Department of Justice.

Q Do conversations include gun shows, purchases at gun shows?

MR. CARNEY: Again, I don’t have -- I don’t want to narrowly define specific measures that may or may not be proposed. We’re looking at possible legislation and we’re having conversations with stakeholders on all sides of the issue.

Chris.

Q Thanks, Jay. I have some questions for you on marriage. Last week, the Maryland statehouse recommitted a bill legalizing same-sex marriage to committee because proponents didn’t feel like they had enough votes for passage. The measure is effectively dead for this year even though Democrats have control of the chamber. By not supporting same-sex marriage, is the President, as head of the Democratic Party, giving cover to Democrats in that chamber who don’t support the bill?

MR. CARNEY: Chris, the President’s position on gay marriage is well known. He addressed this in December at the press conference and I don’t have anything new for you on that.

Q So is the President not concerned that this measure failed to progress in that chamber?

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have anything for you on that either.

Q One last question, one last question. The proponents of this bill said they’re going to try again in 2012. You said he’s grappling with the issue of same-sex marriage. The President said he’s wrestling with it. Is he going to pin down support for marriage equality and make an announcement before next year in time for these efforts --

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have any timing for you on that either.

Yes.

Q Moroccan King has delivered a speech in which the government will change the reform (inaudible) constitution to give more power for the prime minister and lose more freedom. So does the White House have any comments on Morocco speech?

MR. CARNEY: I’m not sure if we have anything specifically on that. We encourage political reforms that liberalize the governments there, that allow for greater participation and representative government, and that applies across the region.

Q Jay, I have two questions, one a follow-up. Is it safe to assume that the GCC countries have not coordinated or informed the United States about their move to enter Bahrain, considering that they’re close allies of the United States? And second, the Turkish Prime Minister said that it’s counterproductive to have military intervention in Libya by NATO or any other country. Does this complicate your effort or all-options-on-the-table kind of approach?

MR. CARNEY: Regarding the no-fly zone and other options, nothing has changed since I last addressed this question five minutes or so ago. So the -- and with regards to Bahrain, we’ve made clear that we call on the nations in the region to show restraint and to honor the peaceful protestors by not using force against them. We make that -- call on the Bahraini government and the GCC countries as well.

Q So they haven't informed you? You don’t know anything --

MR. CARNEY: I don’t have anything on that.

Yes.

Q Jay, last week, Robert Einhorn over at State had a comment on Iran’s nuclear program. He said that the U.S. believes that Iran intends to get to the brink of a nuclear capability but won’t go to breakout. Can you talk about the extent to which that's been the subject of the conversation here at the White House by the President?

MR. CARNEY: I don't have anything -- any new information on that since the last time we addressed -- Ron, if you can talk to State about those particular comments.

Q Is that going to change his calculus at all?

MR. CARNEY: Well, we’ve made very clear that we are very concerned about Iran’s pursuit. We and a lot of our international partners maintain that concern, so I think that still holds.

Yes.

Q Secretary Clinton last week told Congress that she wasn’t sure that a no-fly zone would actually be effective. She cited Iraq and Kosovo. Was she stating administration policy?

MR. CARNEY: Well, as I’ve made clear from this podium and others have made clear, too, that it is very important -- no matter what options we choose -- that we are aware of what is entailed in applying them, enforcing them, and that we are confident that the goals we set out for them are achievable.

The fact that, as Secretary Gates and others have said, that a no-fly zone is a serious matter and with costs associated and risks associated doesn’t mean that it’s off the table. It’s still very much on the table. I think the purpose of having Secretary Clinton or Secretary Gates or others make people aware of the seriousness of a measure like that is simply that; so that we all are aware going into this process should that decision be made -- or other decisions be made -- that we know what we’re talking about and what we would be pursuing.

Q But she said it doesn’t work. So why would it be on the table?

MR. CARNEY: No -- well, I don't want to parse her words. I think -- but what I have made clear and others have made clear is that we need to know -- we would in any process, any decision like this we would make, we would have a plan, which I think elements are being developed at NATO about what a no-fly zone plan would look like and its implementation would look like should that be chosen. And it would obviously include within it discussion about its presumed effectiveness, the impact it would have, the risks associated with it and the potential costs associated with it.

Q Have you run any numbers on that as to cost?

Q She said it didn't get rid of the leader --

MR. CARNEY: I don't have any -- no, I don't.

Q She said it didn't get rid of the leader. It didn't stop the violence. So what would be the point?

MR. CARNEY: Again, making -- she’s making an observation about a past exercise. Before we take any action, we would evaluate what that action would mean if it were applied in the specific case at hand.

Q Can I follow up, Jay?

MR. CARNEY: Yes.

Q Thanks, Jay. I don’t want to ask about what the U.S. is ready to do or not ready to do, and I have lot of sympathy towards caution, but my question is about what would the U.S. accept others to do? Would it be conceivable that somebody else who seems to be much more eager to call for a no-fly zone, like France, like Arabic states, could you accept that they are taking the lead and say, okay, if France want to do it, together with Egypt, it’s fine with us? Or would the U.S. prefer to be in control of the process because the consequences would also be consequences for the position of the U.S. in the region?

MR. CARNEY: Well, I think I have made clear that we feel it’s very important that this -- the actions we take in response to the situation in Libya be international actions, that we work in concert with our international partners. So, quite the contrary; this is not about the United States dictating what happens working with our international partners. So the consultations continue with the French and the British and others about what other measures we can take together.

So I don’t -- I think we welcome the fact that there is so much international approbation and international unity in condemning what the Qaddafi regime is doing, and so much discussion with our international partners about all the different measures that we could do together to continue to put pressure on Qaddafi, to get him to cease and desist what he’s doing against his people, and ultimately to remove him from power.

Q Could it also happen without involvement of the United States?

MR. CARNEY: Well, right now we’re discussing at the United Nations, in Brussels at NATO, with our international partners what the various options are. We’re very engaged in that discussion and continue to have that specific option on that the table.

Q Just two questions, Jay.

MR. CARNEY: Okay, I’m going to wrap it up here. Thank you very much.

Q When does he fill out his bracket? When is the Andy Katz exclusive?

MR. CARNEY: Stay tuned.

END
1:58 P.M. EDT

As part of our Women's History Month Women in the Administration Series, meet Taryn Benarroch, Confidential Assistant in the Office of the Secretary of Education. In this post, you'll hear about Taryn's role models, her supportive family, her passion for education, and the TEACH initiative she helps run at the Department of Education.

Economic Development Administration (EDA) is kicking off i6 Green - a $12 million multi-agency competitive grant program designed to identify, support, and reward the nation's best ideas for technology commercialization in six different regions of the country.

Victoria Espinel, U.S. Intellectual Property Enforcement Coordinator, announces the release of 20 legislative recommendations to Congress designed to improve intellectual property enforcement.

view all related blog posts

Fuente: whitehouse.gov