The Political Climate: an ongoing commentary on the NH Primary and Climate Change

Even as the presidential candidates do their level best, in bipartisan fashion, to take our attention away from things that really matter, the Local Energy Committees continue to work hard on the ground to MAKE THINGS HAPPEN and GET THINGS DONE.  This just in from Peterborough:

“Last night the Selectmen in Peterborough voted to endorse an initiative to reduce carbon emissions in town operations 5% by 2010. Nancy Gamble did a nice job presenting her town energy and emissions audit data and the Town Energy Advisory Group followed with a discussion of carbon emission reduction options. Hats off to the Selectmen, Rodney Bartlett, the head of DPW, and Nancy!   The plan is to continue to work closely with Rodney as well as collaborate with Monadnock Carbon Challenge to encourage a town wide 5% carbon emissions reduction target for local organizations and residents, ideally kicking off at the Monadnock Wellness Fair in September.”

(Did we ever mention that the first Peterborough petition signature in support of the NH Climate Change Resolution was that of Congressman Charlie Bass?)

The candidates would do well to reach out to the dozens of Local Energy Committee volunteers

Energy and climate change were two of the main issues taking the stage last night at the Democratic Presidential Debate in South Carolina.  After hearing very little about climate change at the last CNN debate, it was about time!  Thanks to You Tube and the thousands of US voters who submitted questions on video, the debate was more representative of American voters and climate change was finally on the table at a CNN sponsored debate.  Here is TPC’s recap:

One of the most notable questions was from a Snowman who asked the candidates what they were going to do to ensure his son would live a good, long life.  Congressman Kucinich responded that in order to truly combat climate change we need to connect ‘global warring’ and global warming.  He emphasized that we need to move away from oil and coal and move towards wind and solar.  He referenced his Works Green Administration plan which would organize Americans around sustainability and conservation. 

The next voter told the candidates what she does to conserve energy personally and asked how the candidates’ policies would reduce energy consumption on a national level.  Sen. Gravel responded first that the answer is to change the tax structure.  Gravel referenced his plan for a fair tax which would tax people on what they spend rather than what they earn.  Gravel said that by addressing the tax structure we could move from a consuming nation to a saving nation.

Sen. Dodd chimed in next referencing his plans to increase fuel efficiency in cars to 50mpg, make his federal fleet hybrid and implement a carbon tax.  Dodd also noted that we need to move away from fossil fuels in order to truly deal with the problem.

Anderson Cooper followed up with another interesting question regarding conservation and asked how many of the candidates took a private jet to get to the debate.  While some seemed hesitant to respond, all of the candidates raised their hands except for Sen. Gravel and Congressman Kucinich.

A question on nuclear power offered Edwards, Obama and Clinton an opportunity to talk about their plans in greater detail.  Stating his opposition to nuclear power, Sen. Edwards emphasized that we need to pursue wind, solar and cellulose based biofuels.  He added that he doesn’t believe we should liquefy coal and that the last thing we need is another carbon based fuel.  Edwards finished by saying that renewable, clean energy sources are the only way to address global warming.

Obama responded to the question stating that there are no silver bullets with the energy crisis and that we need to explore all of our options.  Sen. Obama referenced solar energy, fuel efficiency on cars and an aggressive cap on greenhouse gases and finished by emphasizing that we need to try a series of approaches.

Sen. Clinton finished off the question by citing her Strategic Energy Fund which would take money from oil subsidies saving roughly $50 billion to be spent on what America does best: innovation and technology.  Clinton noted that it is important to consider all alternative sources as well as fuel efficiency for cars and energy efficiency for buildings.  Clinton stated that she is agnostic about nuclear power and that until we figure out what to do with the waste and the cost, it is hard to see it as part of our future.  Sen. Clinton finished by saying that the issue of energy and global warming has the promise of creating millions of new jobs if we do it right.

Check out all of the debate videos here.

CNN will host a similar debate for Republicans on Monday, September 17 in Florida.  If you are concerned about global warming and you have a video camera - send your question in!  If not, send us an e-mail and we’ll get you on video for the next debate.

Here are a few sample climate change video questions submitted by New Hampshire residents.  Make sure you check out the Youtube/CNN Debate tonight.

Governor Mitt Romney returned to New Hampshire this weekend for his reported 20th visit to the state since the 2004 election.  He stopped in for some seafood in Seabrook, a town that could be underwater by the end of the century if scientific predictions about sea level rise are correct.  It only seemed appropriate that he discuss his climate change action plan.  He provided a short summary of his plan to achieve energy independence at home and work with India and China abroad.

Later in the afternoon Romney faced more climate change questions in Exeter and provided more detailed vision of the Romney climate change and energy plan.  As a preface to his plan Romney assured the crowd that a majority of scientists believe that the globe is getting warmer and “they believe that human activity is contributing to it.  I do not know what proportion is human activity or what proportion is other things…but my view is that we can take action.”  He then segued into an explanation his No Regrets Policy.  In this plan America would achieve energy independence and as a positive byproduct of energy independence would reduce GHG emissions.

Romney stated:

“I want to see us develop energy sources in this country that are not CO2 emitting.  I want to see us have renewable resources.  That is why we invest, as we do, in renewables like ethanol, but also cellulosic ethanol, biodesil, biofuel, biomass, solar, wind.  I would like to see us have more nuclear power.  I would like to see us have liquefied coal if we can sequester the CO2.”

Romney touched upon the need for more efficiency but did not mention federal emissions reductions, rather he believed that higher costs would cause a market shift and more efficient vehicles.  He finished his remarks by discussing the need for America to work with India and China on climate change, one of the Carbon Coalition’s Seven Benchmarks of a climate change action plan.  He does not want the United States to unilaterally set limits on emissions without cooperation from India and China.

Later in the Exeter town meeting, Romney discussed how the United States must drill for oil domestically to achieve energy independence.  He stated: “I believe that drilling is responsible, I do not believe that it is environmentally unfriendly.”  This is a point where Romney’s priorities of achieving energy independence and fighting climate change diverge in his No Regrets Policy.  To read more about how increased domestic drilling affects climate change click here.

To hear audio of Romney in Exeter Click here: Audio Clip #1, Audio Clip #2