Obama on energy and climate change
This Grist interview is half a year old, but given Barack Obama’s recent win in Iowa, it’s worth revisiting his position on the environment and energy. The interview reveals someone who doesn’t just pay lip service to these issues, but who understands them thoroughly and articulates them in a thoughtful way.
As a Canadian, I can only observe this presidential race unfold. But from where I’m sitting, Obama is saying the right things at a time when, more than anything, we need U.S. leadership on the climate-change file.
UPDATE: I’m linking to Joseph Romm’s Climate Progress, which challenges DeSmogBlog.com for calling Obama “SmogMaker of 2007.” Romm is completely shocked that DeSmogBlog, an otherwise well-respected blog, would take shots at Obama that are misleading and unfair, to say the least. I agree completely with Joe on this one. I encourage you to read DeSmogBlog’s original post, and then look over Romm’s response.
UPDATE 2: DeSmogBlog.com has graciously apologized to Obama and admitted it made a mistake by awarding the senator a “SmogMaker of 2007″ award.
Tyler Hamilton is editor-in-chief of Corporate Knights magazine and a business columnist for the Toronto Star, Canada's largest daily newspaper. In addition to this Clean Break blog, Tyler writes a weekly column of the same name that discusses trends, happenings and innovators in the clean technology and green energy market. This blog is a personal project started in April 2005. It is not an official blog of the newspaper.
January 7th, 2008 at 12:51 pm
I’m a little concerned that Obama is too tied in to clean coal, which I see as an expensive diversion with risk since we don’t know whether it will work. He comes from my state, Illinois, a big coal state. Hopefully more promising technologies will get the attention they deserve, because they don’t have the lobbying muscle of the established energy companies.
Stephen
January 7th, 2008 at 3:46 pm
DeSmogBlog’s research re the prize was flawed in research. Apologies made. Case closed.
It’s good to see the the blogosphere following significant developments in the domain we all -should- care about. Jerome a Paris at Eurotrib made a nice one recently on a silly + fear mongering main article in the FT on Gazprom’s plans in Nigeria (here)
Regarding presidential candidates in the US: Oboma and other democrats I’ve read about are of a different and better ilk than the current person. No doubts about their intentions.
Problems arise when one of them gets into office. Then the usual mechanisms / processes inherent in large organizations have to be dealt with.
As I see it, a candidate should have walked the talk for quite a while. Changing light bulbs now, trading in one’s ICE car for a hybrid now and all that PR stuff, I find not convincing. If not an indication of sloppy and incremetal environmental walking.
I find Dennis Kucinich (here) and his wife being a vegan for a long time a good reason to want to see an in depth interview with him on matters of sustainability. Or a speech like Naomi Klein delivered in the Netherlands a while ago (here).
His campaign paper on energy makes me hopeful he would make a very suitable candidate, regarding content (here)
What I would find convincing, is a campaign with
- public
- non reversable
- non negotiable
- nail hard
agreements to shift budgets & set up regulations enabling market forces serving a global sustainable society (ecologic, social, economic, see also here)
Use the Manhatten project as example for realising what has been proposed in Scientific American of this January: ‘Sunny outlook. Can sunshine supply all US electricity?’ (here).
This would trigger the European Commission to adapt TREC’s whitepaper (here). Since otherwise it would lose it’s sought environmental leadership + lose a huge market when OPEC countries would start investing in these technologies to generate clean energy in the post -cheap- oil & gas era.
China and India will recognize leadership and follow suit.
And consumers will be willing to pay a premium for their products.
[which is actually no premium, but rather the end of an externalization of cost. Or so we wished: the blame for child labour, environmental degradation, supporting dubious regimes and waging -economic and military- wars is on us for all able to see]
Combine this with Project Better Place’s plan (here), Gezen’s Solar Mobilization fund (here) and The Elders guidance (here)
and then there would be something to make all blogs cheer.
Make the Planet and all its inhabitants of all times cheer.
I imagine DeSmogBlog’s initial reaction was based on a -formally premature, but statistically correct- bau frustration. Which they projected to the candidate with the largest tension between offering a hope of a better future and the pitfall of staying in old tracks, leading all of us further astray.
Emil M
January 7th, 2008 at 9:28 pm
StephenB,
Most of our electricity comes from coal right now. Solar and Wind will continue to scale up fast, probably amazingly fast for solar, but they it will still take time for them to grow to a size that contributes large amount of power to the USA grid. There’s China and India to consider as well. It’s not a question of coal or renewables. It is a question of dirty or clean coal. We need to make the later work to realistically avoid GW.
Recommend chapter 8 of “Apollo’s Fire” by Sen. Jay Inslee and Bracken Hendricks
January 8th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I think that’s true to an extent. Most of the clean coal plants I’ve heard about are being built from scratch though, and this investment is what I was thinking of. Lately, as I’m sure you’ve heard, new coal plants have been opposed by the locals.
The current lax EPA rules for coal plant emissions have got to be changed in any case. The older plants especially emit far too much mercury, NOx, and sulfur oxides.
It will take a while for the transmission grid to be built to support utility scale solar from the sunnier states to the northern states, and a mix of power will be needed, I agree.
Stephen_B
January 8th, 2008 at 6:12 pm
What i like to add is that we can waith at eachother for the other one to start(as a continent). What i prefer to see and do so is start working here in Europe as fast as we can so we are the first to finish the energytransitionprocess. We can easely beat Amerika but focussing on them is excualy not interresting. Lets focus on ourselves. May cost a little but the winner takes it all so they say. Just for the fun of it.
Victor Luijtjes
January 9th, 2008 at 3:53 am
.
Agreed, let’s make it a sport. Winner takes all (and gets rich supplying all with the technology for a clean Planet (here))
Please note that technology alone will not get us off the hook.
We need a system change, where institutions, regulations, culture, people’s strivings change. All in sync.
Institutions: reverse the US candy budget ($29bln annually) with the UN-budget ($1bln annually) and solve the obesity problem as well as providing all with clean drinking water and go to the root of the strife in Darfur, Iraq, Afghanistan: a big mea culpa where it’s due. For starts.
Regulations: all gov’t bodies aquire all their stuffs organic, child labour free, cradle to cradle, 100% clean energy produced and local wherever possible. And demand all parties rendering services to them to follow suit.
Then tune in to your local radio network, watch the blogs and the stock exchange and see what the market does.
Surprise: capitalism needed a little push!
Culture: when the Clintons become outmoded, perhaps some fresh air can come in from one window of opportunity or another
When speakers from the blogtrenches of sustainability (here) come to the fore of the news shows.
People’s striving’s: when cultural creatives (25% in the US; will be approx the same in other Western countries) live up to their better selves and start walking.. Aye, there’s the rub!
Concluding: together these points stand, devided they fall.
Pace e Bene,
Emil M
January 9th, 2008 at 7:28 am
Winning just for the honnor. When ready we can start helping others ofcource. Why alway’s for the money??? The idee of with water playing kids in Afrika means something to.