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

Today I begin a three-day run of pinch-hitting for your usual blogger. Before leaving, however, she did go to see John Edwards in Bedford on Friday. In addition to snapping this photo of the candidate holding a Carbon Coalition sign (the bottom half says “Global Warming,” in case you were wondering) she asked him a question about what he would do if he was representing the US at the G8 Summit. He doesn’t answer the exact question, but his response was comprehensive. Here you go:

“Well, I think America has no credibility when a dealing with global warming because we are the worst polluter on the planet…we cannot go to China and India and fashion a global solution to this problem until we first clean up our act. So here’s what I’d do, let me give you specifics….”

He then goes into specifics: 1. reduce carbon emissions by 80% by 2050; 2. auction carbon credits and use ”a big chunk” of that money to invest in renewables, develop carbon sequestration/capture technology, and build the most fuel-efficient vehicles on the planet; 3. raise fuel-efficiency standards; 4. ban building more coal-fired power plants; and, 5. open up electric grid to greater competition. With these done we can “go to China and India and say, we want to work with you…and we we ought to do is say work with us, we want to solve this problem forever. We’re cleaning up our act and we either have developed or we are developing the technology that will make that successful and we would like to make that technology available to you as part of the bargaining process.” Check back later this week for the audio.

Meanwhile, we are told that Senator Obama is experiencing a disconnect between the needs of his current constituency in Illinois and his wished-for constituency (the US of A), on the issue of liquid coal. Via Anne Havemann in Maryland:

“Some members of Congress are claiming that [liquid coal] is the right way to move America beyond oil. However, this tranportation fuel made from coal would actually double the global warming pollution coming from our cars and planes! Who supports this? A number of Senators including none other than Senator Barack Obama. That is totally unacceptable from a Senator who, on his website, has this to say about global warming: ‘We need to take steps to stop catastrophic, mandmade climate change. If we do not act, the consequences will be devastating for future generations, especially for the poorest global populations.’ “

For more information, visit the US Climate Emergency Council website.

To put this in context, China - nothing if not a beacon of environmental responsibility (joking, of course) - is considering abandoning its liquid coal projects.

I’m pinch-hitting for the usual TPCer who is currently up on Cannon Mountain at the House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming’s field hearing. We did talk earlier and here is a report from the scene of the Democratic debate last night.

First, there was no global warming question last night. This is becoming something of a pattern despite the clear concern expressed by voters. It was a positive sign that several candidates used a stupid question from Wolf Blitzer about gas prices (more on this later) to talk about global warming (to Wolf’s apparent distress). Does this mean that candidates are finally feeling comfortable with “climate change” and “global warming” and will not longer reflexively run to the semantic cover of “energy independence” every time greenhouse gasses waft into a discussion?

While the candidates seem to “get it,” Wolf Blitzer clearly doesn’t. In a debate filled with broad questions that called for the candidates to give big-picture answers, the one energy question was, essentially, “what would you do to lower gas prices?” Without minimizing the impact that higher gas prices have on the economy, this is a narrow short-term policy question. The real question is (and Wolf could have led into it by citing the prices at the pump) how will your energy policy move us away from the vagaries of gas pricing and reliance on greenhouse gas-producing fossil fuels and towards a system that is environmentally responsible, economically feasible, and affords the US energy independence? Answers to that kind of question are helpful in choosing a president. As long as the journalists asking the questions equate per gallon gas prices with energy policy, the public will be denied the full picture.

Continuing the theme of the media not quite getting it, Andrew Cline is apparently not kidding when he writes that the solution is to drill more (keep scrolling, you’ll find it). Maybe I just don’t get his sense of humor.

So will there be a global warming question at the Republican debate tomorrow night? Will the Republicans be asked evolution-style to raise their hands if they believe in the scientific consensus on human-induced global warming? It seems like this would be useful information for voters. Last night was an opportunity missed.

It seems that Sen. John Edwards is working to separate himself from the other candidates on the issue of climate change.  Not only has he pledged to make his campaign climate neutral, but he has already released a detailed energy plan, “Achieving Energy Independence & Stopping Global Warming Through A New Energy Economy.”  Although established as a leader amongst the candidates on this issue, I was excited to see a UNH student put him on the spot last night at the town hall meeting.  Questioning his true commitment to climate change the student mentioned a rumor she had heard that the Edwards’ are building a 20,000 sq. ft. house–that’s quite the footprint!  Edwards responded “look, I’m not claiming to be holier than thou,” and then he noted the energy saving steps they’ve taken during the building process–from installing solar panels to buying all “five star” appliances (Elizabeth quickly corrected him with a stage whisper that they are actually called ”Energy Star”).  I was impressed by his honesty, but it was an answer to a later question that then irked me about his personal “footprint.”  Another student asked him what qualities should she be looking for when choosing a candidate to vote for.  “I think a President can lead by example” and if it were him, he said, “I would be judging him personally.”  Well, if that’s the case, he might want to dig out his bicycle from his gigantic garage and start biking to work (Elizabeth did pull the student aside at the end of the meeting to tell her that although “it’s still big” their house is actually only 10,000 sq. ft.).  

I also had the chance to see Sen. Barack Obama today at a town hall meeting in East Rochester.  When asked what he thought was the most important environmental issue today, Obama responded: “The climate change issue is the most serious environmental issue that we face because once you hit some of these tipping points and you get the entire global system shifted you can’t reverse it.  We’re on a trajectary to get to that tipping point…We’re going to have to start acting right away…As president it will be one of my top two domestic priorities.  We have to see it not only as a challenge but also as an opportunity.” 

On my way out I shook Obama’s hand, gave him a Carbon Coalition sticker, and asked him if he plans to have a carbon neutral campaign.  “We’re investigating setting it up” he said rather ambiguously, “we’re the youngest campaign but that’s something we’re looking into right now.”  To take his words, “We’re going to have to start acting right away”…

Audio clips of Obama and Edwards will be posted shortly.

Nothing in “The Political Climate “or Carbon Coalition communications is meant to imply an endorsement of any candidate or political party.

George Pataki remains ambiguous on the question of whether or not he will run for president.  “Oh that,” he said to a reporter in NH yesterday.  “I’m going to focus on policy, let the politics take care of itself and then make a decision farther down the road.”  During his visit to the Granite State yesterday he did make one thing clear: the issue of global warming “cries out for a strong national policy.”

Pataki participated in the “Climate Change and Working Forests” conference in Concord.  He spoke about his involvement in the Regional Greenhouse Gas Initiative during the panel ”Climate Change Action by Governments and Non-Governmental Organizations.”  He began by explaining that as an owner of 300 acres of forest in upstate New York, he understands first-hand that global warming is already impacting the forest industry.  Last year he hoped to log some of his land but couldn’t because it never froze.  Pataki went on to say that the forest industry is going to be “a part of the solution and not a part of the problem.”  Under RGGI, foresters could receive economic benefits or “credits” in a cap and trade system.  Pataki also wants to see investments in new technologies such as cellulosic energy production.