Seacoast NRG

[Note:  I have provided an updated summary, as of November 11, 2007, at this post:  November update: the Democratic presidential candidates on energy and climate change.]

Sunday night’s Democratic debate in Manchester left me more than a little disappointed in its content.  Given that we are at war, I guess I shouldn’t complain, but I am anxious to know and understand our next President’s plans for energy and mitigation of climate change.  I did see that no one seems to like high gas prices, but learned little beyond that.

To find out where the candidates stand on the issues of energy and climate change, I researched their websites to find each candidate’s statements (what we used to call position papers) on energy, the environment, and climate change.  I had hoped to provide a critical review of each candidate’s plans, but quickly realized that a better goal was to simply determine if the candidate even has a plan.  A critical review of the existing plans will need to wait for another day.

My quick summary of their positions is shown below, presented in alphabetic order by the candidate’s names.  I’ll try to do a similar assessment of the Republican candidates following their debate in Manchester on Tuesday.

Joseph Biden, Senator from Delaware

Unfortunately, Biden’s presentation of energy and climate change issues is weak.  He clearly places much greater emphasis on national security and foreign affairs, which are his strengths; he devotes little to energy and climate change, and provides almost no details. 

Climate change excerpt:

The United States, as the strongest nation in the world, must return to a leadership role to solve global warming. Containing greenhouse gas emissions within our own borders is a necessary and important start - but it is not enough. Joe Biden has led a bipartisan coalition calling on the President to return to negotiations for a new climate change treaty. Developing countries - China, India, Mexico, Korea and Brazil - will soon be the greatest source of greenhouse gas pollution. They must be a part of the solution.

But we cannot exert pressure on these countries until we take meaningful action to limit greenhouse gas emissions here at home. Joe Biden supports a “cap and trade” approach to regulating emissions and investment in technologies that can significantly reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Hillary Clinton, Senator from New York

Although Clinton makes it clear that she realizes the importance of energy policy and mitigating climate change, her site is surprisingly thin on details.  The specifics of her plan are not clear.

Climate change excerpt:

Hillary recognizes that global climate change is one of the most pressing moral issues of our time. She supports policies to reduce carbon emissions and other pollution that contribute to global warming.

In the White House, Hillary will lead the charge to stop global warming by investing in clean energy technologies, establishing a national market-based program to reduce global warming pollution, increasing our fuel efficiency, and restoring the United States’ rightful place as a leader in international efforts to address the problem of climate change.

Christopher Dodd, Senator from Connecticut

Dodd does a better job of at least stating his positions and providing some good details in his 14-point plan.  Dodd, like nearly all of the other candidates, talks in terms of energy independence, which is a popular but wholly unrealistic buzzword.  However, his willingness to put hard numbers and goals in his plan worth noting.

Climate change excerpt:

[Goal:] Reduce 80 percent of greenhouse gas emissions by 2050. By mandating the framework of the Sanders “Cap-and-trade” legislation and the toughest, most transparent rules possible, we can make serious reductions to carbon emissions every decade. By 2020, the U.S. must reduce its emissions by 15% of 80 percent below 1990 levels; by 2040, emissions must be reduced by 2/3 of 80 percent; and by 2050, emissions must be reduced to a level that is 80 percent.

John Edwards, former Senator from North Carolina

Edwards’ website presents a detailed plan for energy and climate change, and includes specific targets, such as making 25% of our energy supply come from renewable sources by the year 2025.  He has clearly invested significant time in drafting these plans, and liberally annotates the details with references.

Climate change excerpt:

Cap and Reduce Global Warming Pollution:   Edwards will set an economy-wide limit on the emission of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases.  He will build on the precedent of the Clean Air Act of 1990 — which limited pollution causing acid rain through a sulfur dioxide cap-and-trade system — to reduce pollution in a cost-effective and flexible manner.

Use Science to Set the Caps: Edwards will cap greenhouse gases at levels that the latest climate science has determined to be necessary to avoid the worst impacts of global warming. He will cap greenhouse pollution starting in 2010, reduce it by 15 percent by 2020, and reduce it by 80 percent by 2050, consistent with the most aggressive plans under consideration in Washington.

Make Polluters Pay: Edwards will auction off a portion of the pollution permits to raise $10 billion a year for a New Energy Economy Fund to jumpstart clean, renewable, and efficient energy technologies and create 1 million jobs. Other permits will be sold or given away.

Lead the World toward a New Global Climate Change Treaty: Climate change is an international problem and the U.S. can never solve it alone. China is building the equivalent of one large coal-fired power plant a week and is expected to pass the U.S. as the world’s largest polluter of carbon dioxide in 2009. [NYT, 3/17/2007; WSJ, 3/3/2007]

To lead the world toward a new, effective climate change treaty, Edwards will:

Make Our Own Commitments to Restore Our Moral Leadership: The U.S. has 4 percent of the world’s population but produces a quarter of its carbon dioxide emissions. It is one of only three developed nations that has refused to limit its greenhouse gas pollution. By adopting caps, Edwards will help the U.S. regain credibility in the world without sacrificing American competitiveness. [Irish Times, 2/14/2007; Greenwire, 10/31/2006]

Involve Developing Economies: Any climate change treaty must include developing countries, which emit significant amounts of carbon and could otherwise serve as a haven for polluters. However, these nations are poorer than the U.S. and emit far less carbon per capita. To bring them to the table, Edwards will share America’s clean energy technology in exchange for binding greenhouse reduction commitments. If necessary, he will insist that strong labor and environmental standards in our trade deals include commitments on climate change. This new deal will require global participation, promote shared responsibility, and let American workers and businesses compete on a level playing field.

Mike Gravel, former Senator from Alaska

Gravel’s presentation on most issues is sparse, and energy and climate change are no exceptions.  He proposes an emissions cap, but little else, and offers few details.  His entire plan is shown below.

Climate change excerpt:

Senator Gravel believes that global climate change is a matter of national security. As President, he will act swiftly to reduce America’s carbon footprint in the world bypassing legislation that caps emissions. By putting a hard cap on greenhouse gas emissions, the U.S. will improve energy efficiency while generating energy from low-carbon sources. Both of these pathways provide lasting benefits from the economic and environmental perspectives. Improved energy efficiency reduces energy costs and makes American-made products more competitive. These pathways provide lasting benefits from both economic and environmental perspectives. America can become an exporter again if we have the correct visionary policy.

However, any legislation will have little impact on the global environment if we do not work together with other global polluters. Fighting global warming can only be effective if it is a collective global effort. As President, Senator Gravel will see that the U.S. launches and leads a massive global scientific effort to end energy dependence on oil and integrate the world’s scientific community in this task.

Dennis Kucinich, Representative from Ohio

Kucinich has a good record on the environment, and generally receives very good ratings from groups like the Sierra Club and the League of Conservation Voters.  But his presentation of his position on energy and climate is very general and weak on details.  He proposes a renewable energy portfolio of 20% by 2010, but offers few other specifics.  Kucinich did attend the Step It Up on the Seacoast rally in April, but I cannot find a specific statement on his website related to climate change.  He instead offers a video clip, which is located using the link below.

Climate change excerpt:

Kucinich climate change video.

Barack Obama, Senator from Illinois

Obama’s site, while it does present a plan, is surprisingly sparse on details regarding energy and climate change plans.  In this regard his site is similar to Clinton’s.  One clever idea is his proposal to publicly assist US automakers with their employees’ and retirees’ healthcare costs, if those same automakers will make large investments in hybrids and other efficiency technologies.  He also puts great emphasis on ethanol-based fuels, which isn’t surprising given his midwest base of support.

Climate change excerpt:

We need to take steps to stop catastrophic, manmade climate change. If we do not act, the consequences will be devastating for future generations, especially for the poorest global populations. Barack Obama believes the U.S. must act decisively and creatively to reduce the emission of greenhouse gases that contribute to climate change.

Obama is an original cosponsor of legislation to establish limits on greenhouse gas emissions. To remain below these limits, the bill encourages the market to determine how best to reduce greenhouse gases, rewarding cost-effective approaches through a system of tradeable allowances. Revenues generated from this program will be directed to helping industries and individuals most affected by the limits, and also to fund research and development of new, more efficient, energy technologies.

Bill Richardson, Governor of New Mexico

Richardson’s site does a very good job of presenting his positions on energy and climate change.  He is clearly passionate about these issues, and, like Edwards, has invested significant time in drafting a plan.  But Richardson has gone the extra mile and prepared a separate document that details his position, goals and plans.   This is what I quaintly refer to as a position paper.  Richardson goes so far as to invite public comment, via email, on his plans.  I can’t yet comment on the substance of his plan, but I’m delighted and relieved to see the detail he presents.

Climate change excerpt:

[Goal:]  Dramatically Reduce Greenhouse Gas Emissions: 90% by 2050, 20% by 2020, 80% by 2040 — ten years faster than scientists say is necessary because we must lead the world, and we can’t afford the possibility of backsliding and inaction. We will start with a market-based cap and trade system for greenhouse gas emissions to create incentives for the electric and industrial sectors to make significant reductions in their carbon emissions. Economists say the world can protect itself from drastic climate change at a cost of 1-3% of our economic activity. We can afford to protect the climate. Given the risks of catastrophic climate change, we can’t afford not to do it.