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

After gorging at the Strafford GOP BBQ on Saturday, Barack Obama hosted an ice cream social in Dover last night.  More FOOD!!! Senator Obama emerged from a wooded area with his wife, his two young daughters, and a group of advisors that included Rep. Carol Shea Porter to speak to the large Dover crowd.

His stump speech included a few references to climate change.  Once again, he told the crowd that if we raised fuel efficiency standards for cars to 45mpg, we would replace the equivalent of all of the oil that we import from the Persian Gulf.  “In the process we can create green technologies that create jobs and businesses,” Senator Obama was then distracted by a fleeting Obama 08 balloon but refocused to say that “we can generate an entire new economy based on green technology that can help to provide jobs and opportunity in rural New Hampshire and all across the country.”

Obama shook what must have been 300 hands, said his goodbyes to the Dover crowd, but before he could get away I asked him if he would on implement a climate change plan before the primary.  He responded, saying that he was the co-sponsor of the strongest cap and trade bill in the Senate right now.  I then asked him if there was anything beyond to Boxer/Sanders Legislation.  He responded: “I will probably combine that with a fuel efficiency standard increase, a renewable energy standard.  There will be four or five pieces.”

A similar interaction transpired after Obama’s event in Derry this afternoon.  Again, a fellow employee asked Senator Obama if he planned on implementing a climate change plan, and again he referenced three pieces of legislation.

Legislation for economy-wide emissions reductions is an undeniably important piece of a comprehensive climate change plan, as it is the first of the carbon coalition’s seven benchmarks, but it is only one of seven benchmarks.  Senator Obama’s focus on legislation is reflective of his experience in government which is primarily as a legislator on the state and national level.

I realize that Obama was just shaking hands and trying to leave the events when he faced these questions, but a focus on legislation ignores fundamental elements of a climate change plan.  A comprehensive plan must include international cooperation, federal planning, aggressive R&D, and a shift in budget priorities.

Listen to Obama: Dover 1, Dover 2, Derry Coming Soon

We are asking the presidential candidates to commit to a comprehensive climate change action plan to be implemented within 150 days of being elected.

The House is set to debate a new energy bill today, but this is by no means a climate change plan.  Many key provisions that would help our nation reduce its carbon footprint and achieve energy security are conspicuously missing. 

Even after the Senate passed an energy bill that raised CAFE standards to 35 mpg, there was no mention of raising fuel economy standards in the House.  Read about the Senate bill in our June 22 blog.  There is also no renewable energy standard included in the bill.  Both fuel efficiency and renewable energy standards would help free our country from the environmental burden of oil and ensure that American industry not fall farther behind the curve on clean renewable energy.

Here is what E&E News reported would be included in the bill:

“The underlying 786-page energy bill is a combination of measures reported out of roughly 10 committees. Major provisions include greater appliance, lighting and building efficiency; funding to boost biofuels development and delivery; a host of other renewable energy research program authorizations; a measure to make the federal government ‘carbon neutral’; programs to boost development and demonstration of carbon capture and sequestration; steps to create a ’smart’ electrical grid; repeal of some Energy Policy Act of 2005 royalty incentives; and many others.”

These provisions are improvements, but fall drastically short of actually combating climate change.  The title of today’s blog; “No energy bill can substitute comprehensive climate change legislation” was a direct quote from yesterday’s New York Times editorial “An Incomplete Energy Bill.“  The statement touches on the important difference between the issue of energy and climate change.

The Business Roundtable, an association of 160 chief executives of the nation’s most powerful corporations called for “collective actions” to be taken to reduce the risk of global warming in a policy statement on climate change.  According to their website, the Business Roundtable is an association of CEOs “committed to advocating public policies that ensure vigorous economic growth, a dynamic global economy, and the well-trained and productive U.S. workforce essential for future competitiveness.”  The group’s members include many of the companies whose name we would recognize traveling around New Hampshire: Exxon Mobil, Coca-Cola, General Electric, and General Motors.

The Business Roundtable’s Climate Change Statement released yesterday recognized the scientific evidence that the burning of fossil fuels and deforestation both contribute to global warming.  They then stated that, “Business Roundtable supports collective action that will lead to the reduction of GHG emissions on a global basis…with the goal of ultimately stabilizing them at levels that will address the risks of climate change.”  Business Roundtable President, John Castellani said that the statement “marks the first time that a broad cross-section of business leaders from every sector of the U.S. economy have reached consensus on the risks posed by the climate change and the need for action.”  Though the association reached a consensus on the need to address climate change, divisions remain concerning the appropriate methods to combat the problem.

It is not just American business leaders that are recognizing that combating climate change could stimulate economic growth but the Presidential candidates are as well.  Senator John Edwards released his “green collar” jobs plan last Friday in Humboldt Iowa.  Forbes Magazine website reported that Edwards’ plan would create 150,000 “green collar” jobs per year, subsidize 50,000 government jobs in the renewable energy sector, and create over a million jobs by investing in renewable energy in renewable energy.

• An association of 160 of the most influential business leaders in the nation agrees about climate change.
• 164 New Hampshire towns called for national leadership by passing the New Hampshire Climate Change Resolution.
• Global warming will be impossible to ignore in the months leading up to the New Hampshire primary, but we must remain diligent.

With so much talk about ‘firsts’ in the upcoming election, it seems only necessary that the Carbon Coalition should clarify what ‘first’ we want to see in the next president.  We want to see the first green president!  I ran across the ’green president’ term in “The Power of Green” the New York Times Magazine article written by Thomas Friedman.  Friedman’s view on the issue resonates strongly with many in the Carbon Coaliton, including the shared vision that global warming should be the ultimate political unifier.  The Carbon Coalition has aimed to remove the partisanship from the issue of global warming since our early days.

Friedman writes: “I think that living, working, designing, manufacturing and projecting America in a green way can be the basis of a new unifying political movement for the 21st century.  A redefined, broader and more muscular green ideology is not meant to trump the traditional Republican and Democratic agendas but rather to bridge them.”

“Green” has even penetrated the U.S. Army with the birth of a new military movement; the “Green Hawks.”  In Friedman’s article, he states that the Army recently converted to insulated, high-efficiency tents that use 40% less air conditioning.  Why? Initially it was an attempt to save lives of those transporting the fuel to run the airconditioners, who faced constant attacks from insurgents.  It became part of a larger Army effort to ”eat its own tail,” or establish more efficient supply lines by conserving energy.  Dan Nolan, who oversees energy projects for the Army’s Rapid Equipping Force said; “Energy independence is a national security issue…it’s the right business for us to be in.”  Whatever their motives may be, energy efficiency is common sense.

If the army, big business, local governments, state governments, faith based groups, and everyday citizens are all devoting themselves to the issue of global warming, it must be recognized by all (especially the presidential candidates) as the political bridge it can become.