When consumers do not take full advantage of efficiency gains, it is because they are weighing other factors that influence their decision making. When the federal government arbitrarily places one of those factors over others, it makes consumers worse off.

Critics play a dangerous game when they denounce the science and law EPA has used to defend clean air for more than 40 years. The American people know better.

Any first-generation technology will. But we are looking at carbon the same way we look at every pollutant under the Clean Air Act; we look for the new technologies that are available. We recognize that these power plants are going to be around for decades.

Even if there's controversy, I'm going to make the decision, and people are going to be happy in one instance and unhappy in the next. But that's the job I've been given and the job I'm going to embrace.

Proponents of efficiency standards argue that they save consumers and businesses money, reduce energy use, and reduce emissions. But families and businesses already understand how energy costs impact their lives and make decisions accordingly.

We need an international solution to the challenge of climate change, there's no question about it. But the real key is, can you actually get that - or get that solution - without the US' involvement? Can you not lead domestically, and expect the rest of the world will take action... the US needs to lead, we need to be out there.

I think climate change is probably the most extreme, and it's been going on for years because it's very difficult to talk about a planetary issue like climate change and to get people who live within four-year electoral cycles to actually pay attention to something that you predict is happening way in the future.