President Barack Obama announced his nominees to lead the Environmental Protection Agency and the Department of Energy today. After speaking out about global warming in both his Inaugural Address and State of the Union speech this year, the President hopes that the new appointees will help lead the administration toward meaningful climate change policy-making.

Gina McCarthy will step from her current role as assistant EPA administrator for the Office of Air and Radiation, to replace Lisa Jackson for that agency's top spot. Meanwhile, Ernest Moniz will replace Steven Chu as Secretary of Energy in the President's Cabinet. Both nominees will require confirmation by the Senate.

Moniz most recently held a position as the Director of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology's Energy Initiative, overseeing projects that angled to reduce greenhouse gasses. Despite this, his appointment has been met with skepticism from some environmental groups who don't like his record of partnering with big oil companies like BP, Shell and Chevron.

McCarthy has worked with both Democrats and Republicans in the past, including a stint with Obama's Presidential opponent, Mitt Romney. At the announcement, the President said of McCarthy, "Gina has focused on practical, cost-effective ways to keep our air clean and our economy growing."


I'm reporting this comment as:

Reported comments and users are reviewed by Autoblog staff 24 hours a day, seven days a week to determine whether they violate Community Guideline. Accounts are penalized for Community Guidelines violations and serious or repeated violations can lead to account termination.


    • 1 Second Ago
  • 31 Comments
      lad
      • 1 Year Ago
      Here is the energy views of the next DOE head; http://grist.org/news/meet-obamas-energy-secretary-pick-ernest-moniz/ I think it is only a matter of time before he recommends the Keystone Pipeline and Obama approves it to secure more oil money for the Democratic Party from Big Oil. I would like to be wrong on this; but, Washington is run by the money from Big Industies, especially the oil companies.
        Grendal
        • 1 Year Ago
        @lad
        I just read someones commentary on the Keystone pipeline and I couldn't argue with the logic. First, the pipeline is just that - a pipeline. Preventing it from being built will not prevent the oil from being harvested and shipped to wherever it will be sold. It will probably create more pollution by not building the pipeline because then you will use more pollution to ship by tanker and ship to wherever the oil will be refined. The oil will be harvested because there are trillions of dollars to be made from it as demand for the oil hasn't and will not go away anytime soon. If your against the pipeline you would be better focusing your efforts on reducing demand if what you are after is less oil being used. Focusing on how oil is being brought in is really a complete waste of your time and effort. I'd like to hear others opinions but it was hard for me to argue with those points.
        brotherkenny4
        • 1 Year Ago
        @lad
        We should expect nothing else. Our politicians are interested in their true constituency which is those corporations who pay the biggest during election time. Our supreme court has cleared the way for this to happen legally. The difference between the two parties when it comes to pandering to corporations is non-existent. There are some differences, but mostly having to do with how individuals live. They both want to reduce freedoms, but just different ones. That's what you get when you elect a bunch of snakey lawyers.
      ammca66564
      • 1 Year Ago
      Ah, yes. That bastard Muniz has committed the unpardonable sin of partnering with the energy companies to work on energy issues. How dare he! These pillars of our economy must be smashed! Everyone knows we can generate all the energy we need with home windmills and sewer gas.
      tinted up
      • 1 Year Ago
      Another garbage appointment to a garbage position that shouldn't exist in the first place.
        Moosetang
        • 1 Year Ago
        @tinted up
        Which shouldn't exist, the Department of Energy or the Environmental Protection Agency?
          EVnerdGene
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Moosetang
          ? DOE, started in 1977, tasked with reducing our dependence on foreign oil ??? ~16,000 employees ~100,000 contract employees ~$24BILLION annual budget FAIL ? EPA signed into existance by a - shudder the thought - Richard M. Nixon (R) FAIL ?
          PatrickH
          • 1 Year Ago
          @Moosetang
          C all of the above!
      alistair.dillingham
      • 1 Year Ago
      Overqualified Caucasian Males need not apply. RIDICULOUS.
        Spec
        • 1 Year Ago
        @alistair.dillingham
        Yeah, man. Everything is stacked against the white man. Everything!
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
        • 1 Year Ago
        [blocked]
          gpmp
          • 1 Year Ago
          So Dan has come back 'round to "low weight, aerodynamics, high speed, cost optimization etc ". I was wondering when that would happen. He had given himself away months ago with comments like "crimes of incompetence" and "declare Steven Chu insane, . . . life in prison for his crime"
        EVnerdGene
        • 1 Year Ago
        What do you want to happen? Maybe start taxing CO2, so the more you exhale . . . . . ?
      Robu Dahbi
      • 1 Year Ago
      The great and powerful Ozzbummer has spoken. And what ever he said was irrelevant.
      Levine Levine
      • 1 Year Ago
      The \'73 oil embargo was the direct result of America unilaterally breaching the Bretton Wood Agreement by having the Dollar going off the gold -standard. The politically solution, or cover-up, was the creation of the Dept of Energy to ween America off of foreign oil. The mission has failed for more than 40 years. Today, America imports more oil than in \'73. EPA was created as the enforcer of the Federal Clean Air, Land, and Water legislation of the early 70s. Instead, thethe bureaucrates of EPA fornicate and indulge in the \'revolving door\' with the polluters. The result is that America has a growing number of Superfund sites rather than diminishing. Every four years the American people are given a new salesman or re-elect the same conniving salesman who sells the notion that the EPA and the Energy Dept are protecting the people\'s interest from the potium of the Oval Office. Americans are suckers.
      Joseph
      • 1 Year Ago
      All that matters is that if they buy into the global warming hoax, they\'re bad for the country.
        Spec
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Joseph
        "Hoax"? Really? You really think thousands of scientists across the planet are all participating in an elaborate "hoax"? What is it with all these paranoid conspiracy theories these days? I guess people just refused to deal with reality.
      Ziv
      • 1 Year Ago
      Moniz seems like an improvement over Chu. At least Moniz seems to take a glimpse of the real world before he dictates his policies. I don't know much about McCarthy, but if Moniz is indicative of Obama's choices, maybe we won't end up with a "Drunk Uncle Joe" in the cabinet. It is embarrassing enough to have one in the Vice Presidency...
        brotherkenny4
        • 1 Year Ago
        @Ziv
        Nah, Moniz is from the MIT school of disingenuous pandering for more money. There are two organizations that have cornered the market on science BS, those are MIT and Stanford. Take any press release from these guys, hand it to a real expert and he or she will point out the dishonesty in their release. The press however, does not have the capability on it's own to determine the BS and they never ask anyone else.
      Jason Krumvieda
      • 1 Year Ago
      What song is Obama singing in this funny picture?
      • 1 Year Ago
      [blocked]
    • Load More Comments