| 02/20/2008 - Implications of The United States Presidential Race for Future US (and Canadian) Energy and Environmental Policies |
|
By Victor Wulc The upcoming presidential race provides the opportunity to begin an earnest dialogue for a transformational energy policy in the United States. It has been thirty years since a comprehensive attempt to enact laws that will husband our energy sources in an efficient manner and sustain our environment was atop of the nation’s agenda. A confluence of domestic and international events resulting in economic uncertainty, adverse climate change, and geopolitical insecurity has shown energy as the headwater for those events. Oil, natural gas and electricity markets clearly indicate that a fundamental shift in the global supply and demand for energy has quadrupled the price of oil, tripled the price of natural gas and, in many parts of the United States, doubled the price of electricity. Carbon emissions are rising at a level that mirrors rising global temperatures and adverse climate change; since 1999, seven of the last eight years have shown the highest temperature levels in the last one thousand years. Finally, the United States continues to depend significantly on non-democratic and often unstable countries in the Middle East and Persian Gulf for its foreign oil. Major Presidential Nominees The presumptive Republican nominee, Senator John McCain of Arizona, and Democratic contenders, Hillary Clinton of New York and Barack Obama of Illinois, have all elaborately discussed their energy positions throughout this campaign. Each candidate has highlighted a separate centerpiece as his or her energy raison d’etre. John McCain contemplates energy independence as a weapon against the US’ perceived enemies and is another political tactic necessary to secure the US against radical Islam. Hillary Clinton speaks to the economy through green jobs and how the energy chain of commerce will include links in research and development, marketing, distribution and commercialization. Lastly, Barack Obama contemplates the United States joining the global community in mitigating carbon emissions as a moral imperative and maintains that the United States must be a world leader on the issue. A more detailed summary of energy and environmental positions are as follows: Energy and Environmental Issues of the Candidates John McCain: McCain has pledged to end U.S. reliance on foreign oil and says America must modernize the way it generates and employs energy. As president, he would support a “declaration of independence” from foreign oil suppliers and rely on technological innovations to achieve that goal. He supports expansion of safe nuclear power to address energy needs, while providing for safe storage of spent nuclear fuel. In addition, he supports development of flexible-fuel vehicles, along with alcohol fuels made from sugar, corn, switch grass and other biomass resources. Finally, he plans to limit carbon and greenhouse gas emissions by harnessing market forces that will bring advanced technologies such as nuclear energy to the market faster. This will involve implementation of a cap-and-trade system for utility or industrial plants that reduce emissions. McCain believes climate change is a “global problem that requires a global solution.”
Hillary Clinton: Clinton has promised to establish a green, efficient economy that she says will create as many as 5 million new jobs. Like McCain, she plans to set up a cap and trade system for carbon emissions. She has also pledged an 80 percent pollution reduction by 2050 and has proposed the creation of a Strategic Energy Fund that would invest $50 billion into research, development and deployment of renewable energy, energy efficiency, clean coal technology, ethanol and other homegrown biofuels. Oil companies would have the choice between investing in renewable energy or paying into the fund. She has also pledged to require power companies to obtain 20 percent of their electricity from renewable sources by 2020. She would require all federal buildings to increase the use of green design principles and energy efficient technologies. By 2030, all new federal buildings and renovations would be carbon-neutral.
Barack Obama: Obama pledges to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, with a goal of 80 percent by 2050, and make the U.S. a leader in the effort to combat climate change by leading a new international global warming partnership. He also supports implementing a cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and pledges to invest $150 billion over the next 10 years to develop and implement “climate-friendly energy supplies, protect our existing manufacturing base and create millions of new jobs.” He pledges to double federal clean energy research spending. He supports efforts to reduce dependence on foreign oil and plans to reduce oil consumption by 35 percent by 2030. He would require that 25 percent of electricity come from renewable sources by 2025.
Source: Boston Herald Despite the usual acrimony between the candidates and parties during this contentious season, the major candidates all acknowledge the importance of a comprehensive energy and environmental policy. All candidates agree on the importance of a cap and trade program to reduce emissions as well as using renewable resources to displace fossil fuels. During the general election this fall, it is unclear if Republican John McCain will try to significantly distinguish himself from the Democratic candidate and offer more solace to hard line conservative Republicans. Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger, Republican California and a strong advocate for a progressive environmental platform, will temper any McCain leanings to hard line conservatives given the electoral and economic importance of the seventh largest economy in the world. Converging Policies across the Border In June 2007, the Prime Minister Stephen Harper proclaimed Canada an emerging "green energy superpower." However, this commitment is now being questioned inside and outside of Canada. The Harper administration aggressively supports Canadian energy development of all kinds and the tone and tenor of the Harper Administration is similar to many of the themes of the United States’ presidential nominees. Also, similar to the United States, Canada still does not have an official energy policy. Both countries recently took converging policies on environmental emissions by default. Many environmental supporters contend that the government of the United States has abdicated its global responsibilities by not signing the Kyoto Treaty, while Canada ignored its responsibilities after signing the Kyoto Treaty. Both countries rate among the world’s highest emitters and least energy efficient industrialized economies. As a result, internal and external pressures in both countries will eventually require that energy efficiency and carbon emission standards be aligned. Given that a new administration in the White House could precede a national Canadian election by just nine months, energy and environmental policy may find the United States’ past as Canada’s prologue. |