US president Barack Obama’s new policy on emissions announced this week promises an “all-out climate push”.

But as the incumbent US president has discovered during his term and a half, the “audacity of hope” often gives way in reality to the “mendacity of nope”.

It’s a brave initiative and is a demonstration of a second- term US president determined to lead by example.

The timing of his announcement, to clean up coal-burning plants, could not be better – coming only months ahead of the crucial UN global summit on climate change to be held in Paris.

At present there are no federal limits to the amount of pollutants that can be pumped into the air by coal plants in the US.

The Obama administration said the initiative would cost $8 billion but would save up to $54 billion over time.

Unsurprisingly, there was plenty of blowback. Obama’s opponents concentrated on claiming the new rules would push up electricity prices to unaffordable levels.

Their argument is that technology and the market, rather than limits or rules, will achieve balance.

It will come as no surprise that the need to tackle climate change is not in the manifesto of any of those seeking the Republican presidential nomination.

Mood change

Obama’s policy, plus a far more engaged attitude towards climate change by the Chinese, has led to a change of political mood in anticipation of the talks in Paris – certainly a marked improvement from the last big effort in Copenhagen in 2009 which ended in confusion and a cobbled-together deal.

In all, 196 countries will come together in Paris seeking a deal that will come into effect from 2020.

What will be sought is a commitment to limit emissions to less than two degrees above pre-industrial levels.

This time around, a silver bullet will not be sought, rather a quest for individual state commitments to come up with solutions that are fair to all, equitable and ambitious.

So where does Ireland fit into this scenario? Well, it is likely that the country will have its own climate change laws in place by the time the summit takes place.

The Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Bill has reached report stage in the Oireachtas and should be enacted relatively soon into the autumn session.

On first glance, it would indicate that the Government has put climate change at the front and centre of its priorities.

But the reality is a little more prosaic than that. For one, the biggest omission is the absence of binding targets for the medium term and the long term, especially for 2050.

The Government has argued that it will abide by all EU targets, for 2020, 2030 and 2050, but climate change campaigners have argued Ireland should be a leader and innovator, setting an example for others.

Positive elements

It’s no surprise to see that all of the Opposition parties and groups have latched on to this.

Their amendments for the report stage of the legislation invariably hone in on targets – with most calling for specific commitments by Government to decrease emissions by 80 per cent by 2050.

That said, there are some very positive elements in the legislation, not least the establishment of an advisory group.

The Government so far has met its targets by default. The severity of recession helped Ireland succeed with the Kyoto targets.

But the more onerous EU 2020 targets (principally a 20 per cent reduction in emissions compared to 1990) will not be achieved, according to the latest EU Commission assessment.

In addition, Ireland has been talking out of both sides of its mouth a little on this issue.

Our big problem is agriculture, which comprises 32 per cent of all our emissions.

The biggest factor here is beef. Simon Coveney has argued there is no point in Ireland dramatically reducing beef output to meet emission targets, only to allow in less efficient producers to fill that gap.

Beef is to Ireland what coal is to the US. Some 500,000 tonnes are produced each year, 93 per cent of which is exported.

The industry is worth €1.8 billion, no small sum.

Ireland is not an efficient agricultural producer. It has the fifth-lowest footprint in the EU but just beats the average.

Coveney’s argument that agriculture should be considered an exception would carry more weight if Ireland had the lowest footprint in the EU.