Climate Politics

Ralph Nader might jump into the presidential race

[UPDATE: Yep, Nader is officially in.] Ralph Nader is set to appear on NBC’s “Meet the Press” on Sunday (as David noted), and that has tongues wagging. Might he use the occasion to announce that he’s jumping into the presidential race? As you already know, he ran in 2000, garnering 2.74 percent of the popular […]

Last night’s debate

Yeah, so, there was a Democratic debate last night. Far as I can tell, there wasn’t much said about energy or the environment (except in the clean coal ads brought to viewers by debate sponsor ABEC). Both candidates briefly mentioned creating a green economy, but it wasn’t the subject of any back and forth or […]

First time tragedy, second time farce … what about the third?

Ralph Nader announced his 2004 candidacy for president on NBC’s Meet the Press. According to the Nader exploratory committee, Nader will be appearing on Meet the Press this Sunday. Christ.

Will the next president stop construction on the border wall?

Last night's debate included some good news for the embattled wildlife and landscape of the Southwest.

In response to a question about whether or not they would slow construction of the border wall under construction in the Southwest, both Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton criticized the wall as ineffective and counterproductive.

Tasty hatin’

All you Lieberman-Warner haters will not want to miss David Sassoon’s "The 10 Dominoes Toppling Lieberman-Warner."

John McCain scores a big ol’ goose egg on this year’s environmental report card

Today, the League of Conservation Voters released its annual scorecard, which rates legislators based on their votes on issues of environmental significance. The LCV scorecard has its critics, but it’s nonetheless become something of a gold standard when measuring how "green" a lawmaker is. A couple of big stories emerge from this year’s scorecard. The […]

What makes a good climate change plan?

'Tis the season for climate plan meta-analysis. I get asked a lot about the presidential candidates' environmental bona fides, which has led me to put together the following long, dense, and absolutely riveting primer on what to look for in a good climate change plan. These principles apply to cap-and-trade style programs, because that's what all the presidential candidates are proposing.

1. Go deep

The "cap" part of cap-and-trade refers to the emissions level mandated by the legislation. Good legislation considers both the short term and the long term.

The available science indicates we need an 80 percent reduction in greenhouse-gas emissions by 2050. For a variety of reasons (CO2 is a long-lived pollutant; the initial cuts will be easiest, etc.) we should start cutting quickly. Twenty percent by 2020 is a reasonable interim target.

Use these figures as a benchmark, but don't obsess over them. A climate change plan that calls for an 87 percent cut is not necessarily better than one calling for an 84 percent cut. Our understanding of climate change will progress over the next several decades, and we'll adjust accordingly. The important thing for now is that the planned cuts are sufficiently deep and predictable to stimulate a cascade of infrastructure improvements.

McCain gets a zero from League of Conservation Voters; Obama and Clinton score better

Republican presidential candidate John McCain got a score of zero from the League of Conservation Voters for his voting record on environmental issues in Congress in 2007 — not because he voted against environmental protections, but because he simply didn’t show up to vote. McCain missed all 15 of the Senate votes that LCV counted […]

Twenty-seven yoots arrested protesting construction of coal gas plant

A while back, Al Gore wondered publicly why young people aren’t out protesting in front of coal plants. Well, here you go: On Monday, a group of young people chained themselves together to prevent construction of a South Florida power plant — 27 of them were arrested. [UPDATE: According to Matt in comments, it was […]

Confused Washington Times disses McCain and Obama on lack of carbon offsets

In a bizarre twist, the conservative Washington Times, which would normally be critical of fuzzy environmental strategies like carbon offsets, is actually attacking the candidates for not offsetting all their campaign emissions. Opening with an absurd headline, "Green crusades lot of talk," the Times writes:

Sens. John McCain and Barack Obama have called for strict mandatory limits to control greenhouse gases but they aren't leading by example -- each has failed to pay for offsets to cover all of his campaign's carbon emissions.

How does not taking (dubious) voluntary actions carry any implications about one's commitment to serious mandatory limits? Advocating mandatory limits is based on an understanding that two decades of the voluntary approach has not reversed emissions trends. And again and again we've seen how offsets provide at best a limited environmental benefit.

Surely the WT can find more things stories to write about. I've heard it said that Senator McCain has called for carbon limits that are in fact mandatory, but he refuses to call them mandatory. Nah, no story there ...

This post was created for ClimateProgress.org, a project of the Center for American Progress Action Fund.