now that the presidential hopefuls are making the rounds and we the people of this country begin to think about who we see as a best fit for the next president of the united states, it should be known that a stance on climate change is a concern right up there with health care, education, immigration, and the war in iraq.
i've been searching a handful of candidates' websites, and have attached links to their pages on global warming so that you can read for yourself. this issue should be of paramount concern in this upcoming election, and i hope that everyone considers the true costs of inaction or ill-advised and poorly motivated approaches to climate action in their vote for the next president of this country.
here are some links to a few candidates' info on their global warming position; however, i think it is worthwhile to read on and watch the video link at the end of this email before going to the candidates' sites.
1. john edwards, most elaborate climate action site - http://johnedwards.com/about/issues/energy/new-energy-economy/
2. barack obama, lots about transportation industry - http://www.barackobama.com/issues/energy/
3. john mccain, slightly more informative than hillary - http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/65bd0fbe-737b-4851-a7e7-d9a37cb278db.htm
4. joe biden, wants a cap-and-trade system but that's about all he says - http://www.joebiden.com/issues/#0011
5. hillary clinton, not so informative - http://www.hillaryclinton.com/issues/energy/
6. bill richardson, nothing climate change specific, but he does have environmental concerns - http://www.richardsonforpresident.com/issues/page?id=0005
7. rudy giulliani - still can't find anything.
8. mitt romney - totally doesn't think it's an issue - "We can use alternative sources of energy -- biodiesel, ethanol, nuclear power -- and we can drill for more oil here." http://www.mittromney.com/Issue-Watch/Energy
i can't help but notice that all these websites look almost identical as far as the template goes. just an observation.
while i have just begun to investigate the various candidates' stances, i'm surprised by the amount of attention given to ethanol as a primary "solution" to global warming. sure, automobiles contribute significantly to global warming, but in america i think it's less than 1/3 of the total emissions. besides, can we really expect american to give up their suv's?(hopefully one day, but hey, though i walk and take public transportation frequently, i drive a pickup truck too - carbon neutral, but nevertheless). efficiency is certainly an important component to curbing GHG emissions, but we need to focus on setting concrete emission reduction goals, not merely goals of increasing efficiency. i'd really like to see (on top of changes to the auto industry) a push for changes in the production of the production of industrial power. there are ways to actually operate a carbon-negative power plant, i'll attach an easy to understand image explaining (in no extreme detail) how.
ethanol is identified as a way to gain energy independence from oil since we can produce it domestically; however, ethanol made from corn requires a large amount of petroleum-based fertilizers that can essentially offset the desired benefits. i'm under the impression that corn ethanol is another facet of our government's corn subsidies, and an attempt to use the overstocks of our overproduction of corn any way we can (another topic that i'm unfortunately too unversed in to go into, but i will say, current corn farm subsidies are perpetuating the unfortunate farming practices that are wreaking havoc on the land, local economies, and our health. it's also amazing to see the amount of fossil fuels used in the production and transportation of the meals we are so used to eating, something like 10 calories of fossil fuel energy are used to put 1 calorie of food energy on the table here in the US. want to learn more, go read "the omnivore's dilemma" by m. pollan). ethanol is less efficient compared to gasoline, but we'll see how long that holds us back from using more of it. between technological discoveries and the ever-increasing price of fossil fuels, ethanol could be a solution so long as it is derived from cellulosic biomass in a way that doesn't require fossil fuels for its production.
one of the most aggressive plans out there is called the "america leads" plan. the sierra club offers a video overview of this scenario. there are flaws to the video (but there's always a few to every plan), but many of the ideas present in this plan are truly effective. if you've got 8 minutes you should really watch it, it's slam-packed with good information. oh, and immediately following the video you will be brought to a link where you can take literally 20 seconds to fill out a little info and a petition will automatically be sent to the president to promote the 2%/yr reduction goal: http://www.sierraclub.org/roadmap/flash/
as always, please feel free to send your comments and questions to the list.
-jimmy
(5/30/07)
No comments:
Post a Comment