Climate Change and Energy Security

If the United States focused on curbing climate change as soon as a new president took office - or sooner - it could help pull the world from the financial brink, environmental policy experts told Reuters. While climate change may be far from the thoughts of most people in the midst of an economic meltdown, it's not going to go away. Rajendra Pachauri, head of the U.N. Inter-Governmental Panel on Climate Change that shared the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize, predicts that the financial crunch will bring "soul searching about how society might act to reduce dependence on fossil fuels" and shift to renewable energies such as wind, solar or hydropower. A comprehensive energy and climate security plan for America should thus:
* Provide short-term relief to families facing pain at the pump;
* Help create new jobs by strategic investments over the next ten years to catalyze private efforts to build a clean energy future;
* Put a million plug-in hybrids (cars that can get up to 150 miles per gallon) on the road by 2015, aiming to eliminate oil imports from the Middle East and Venezuela within 10 years;
* Ensure 10% of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012, and 25% by 2025.
* Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80% by 2050.
See The Obama-Biden New Energy plan and The Obama-Biden environmental plan. Some argue by pointing out that 2/3 of Americans want offshore drilling, which would worsen our impact on climate change. But, as I have pointed out elsewhere, nearly 2/3 of Americans changed their mind on the economy in the last three weeks. They will change their minds on this issue too. There are stronger forces at play today than even Exxon & cohorts. "Skyrocketing energy prices and the financial crisis have been a wake-up call that something's got to change," Cathy Zoi, chief executive officer of the Alliance for Climate Protection, told the Global Environment Summit this week. And besides, these polls are all loaded by framing the terms of the debate. We need to learn how to do that if we are to help shape public opinion and counter the media bias. It is a trick that every lawyer uses in cross-examination. If you ask whether SOME off-shore drilling should be allowed in an energy mix to escape dependence upon "foreign oil", 2/3 of Americans may say yes. Let us try asking instead:
* "Do you think off-shore drilling will solve America's energy problems?"
* "Will off-shore drilling eliminate oil imports?"
* "Would you rather have Exxon drill more wells off-shore to bring you 2% more oil 10 years from now while raising sea levels (Arctic sea ice shrank to its smallest ever recorded area in September 2007 and came close to breaking the record last month), drowning more coastal cities and generating stronger hurricanes or would you rather get tax rebates for installing solar panels on your roof (employing local labor), wind turbines on your farm and drive a plug-In hybrid getting up to 150 miles per gallon, so that we can eliminate our current imports from the Middle East and Venezuela within 10 years?"