Where Do the Presidential Candidates Stand on Environment and Energy?

From drilling for oil to climate change, the answers may surprise you















Share on Tumblr

Table of Contents:
1: Global Warming: Is It Man-Made? | Reducing Carbon Emissions
2: Offshore Oil Exploration and Drilling | Drilling in Alaska's Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)
3: "Clean Coal" | Natural Gas
4: Nuclear Energy | Endangered Species
5: Water Shortage | Renewable Energy (Solar, Wind, Geothermal)

Nuclear Energy

Obama Even though Illinois has more nuclear power plants than any other state, Obama is not gung ho on that type of energy. Although John Edwards was a stalwart in opposing nuke power, Obama believes that it will likely have a role to play in any mixed bag of alternatives aimed at replacing oil-based energy.

From a December 2007 town hall meeting in Newton, Iowa: "I start off with the premise that nuclear energy is not optimal. So, I am not a nuclear energy proponent."

McCain McCain wants to end the moratorium on building new nuclear plants—the U.S. hasn't broken ground on one in 30 years. His plan puts the country on track to open 45 new facilities by 2030 on our way to constructing a total of 100. Bloomberg.com estimates the proposal will cost taxpayers $315 billion.

From a speech at Missouri State University in Springfield: "Every year, [the 104 operating nuclear] reactors alone spare the atmosphere from the equivalent of nearly all auto emissions in America. Yet for all these benefits, we have not broken ground on a single nuclear plant in over 30 years. … And our manufacturing base to even construct these plants is almost gone. We will need to recover all the knowledge and skills that have been lost over three stagnant decades in a highly technical field."

 

Endangered Species

Obama In August the AP reported that Obama opposed a Bush administration proposal that would bar input from independent scientists in reviews of the plights of endangered species.

From a statement by Obama spokesman Nick Shapiro: "After over 30 years of successfully protecting our nation's most endangered wildlife like the bald eagle, we should be looking for ways to improve it, not weaken it. As president, Sen. Obama will fight to maintain the strong protections of the Endangered Species Act and undo this proposal from Pres. Bush."

McCain McCain had no comment on Bush's proposed blocking of scientist input on the protection of endangered species. He did, however, oppose Congressional spending on a study of grizzly bear DNA that scientists believed would aid in protecting the species—which has been considered threatened since 1975. McCain called the earmark an example of pork barrel spending.

From a McCain TV spot: "Two hundred, thirty-three million for a bridge to nowhere. Outrageous…. Three million to study the DNA of bears in Montana. Unbelievable…. A million dollars for a Woodstock Museum—in a bill sponsored by Hillary Clinton. Predictable…. Who has the guts to stand up to wasteful government spending? One man. John McCain."

Wildcard Wild card:
McCain and Palin sat on opposite sides of the ice floe when it came to deciding whether the polar bear should be listed as an endangered species earlier this year. McCain supported it; Palin was against it. (In May, the U.S. Department of the Interior deemed polar bears "threatened".) Another point of possible contention: so-called Congressional earmarks requested by Gov. Palin to study the genetics of harbor seals and mating habits of crabs—which stand in direct conflict with McCain's stance on using federal funds to study grizzly bear DNA.



15 Comments

Add Comment
View
  1. 1. Eye144 11:47 AM 9/24/08

    vote!

    But also goto www.SolarPanel-Rental.com to register to get a solar system without large upfront charges, or to buy.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  2. 2. jh443 02:14 PM 9/25/08

    These are non-issue matters. This country is going down the tubes and it has absolutely nothing to do with global warming. As long as the American public refuses to address the issues that are tearing apart our economy, things will only continue to get worse.

    Here's a hint: We can stop worrying about how much carbon dioxide we're putting into the air. We'll soon be so poor that we won't be able to afford cars or even electricity for that matter. Our per capita carbon footprint will match that of third world nations because we will BE a third world nation!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  3. 3. jack 07:01 AM 9/26/08

    new energy is very important

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  4. 4. kwhitemd in reply to jh443 01:35 PM 9/27/08

    Man, you are right on in reference to being distracted from the most serious issues at hand. You have the media to blame for this; part of the "doom and gloom" policy.

    I work for a company that has a solution to our energy crisis. If this is not at the top of our priorities list, there will be no economy here. Becoming a third world nation as a result is assured and may be actually getting off lightly.

    I disagree with the theory that humankind CREATED global warming. Has he/she contributed to it, yes. Sarah Palin has asserted this.

    Focus America.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  5. 5. big brother 10:50 AM 9/29/08

    All of a sudden, $150 billion, over 10 years, seeems like a real piker. If we can spend more, constructively, we should do it!

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  6. 6. cshav10 02:24 PM 10/3/08

    The bigger concern is that both the candidates agree on "Clean Coal" as part of their energy program. Clean coal is a myth. There is no known process to scrub the greenhouse gases in a coal-based energy plant. When both the parties agree on something like this beware. The planet and it's citizens are about to get hosed.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  7. 7. synesthesia00 06:52 PM 10/3/08

    I work in the renewable resources industry. I also live where they want to drill for more oil. Can we just not say that word anymore. I hope the LHC will fix everything. I dont even know what that even means.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  8. 8. Susan K 10:14 PM 10/4/08

    McCain voted for the first time for renewable energy on Friday. Only because it was attached to the bailout bill. He previously voted with identical votes to Inhofe on 42 out of 44 votes, against clean reneweables like solar, wind, geothermal and ocean and high tech funding like for algae, a total of 50 times.

    'Mcain's 50 Votes Against Clean Energy' includes all of the links to the Senate roll-call votes for each one so you can verify these votes.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  9. 9. Susan K 10:17 PM 10/4/08

    "Wild card:
    Although McCain has a strong record with regard to global warming, "

    Unfortunately, McCain has successfully created media buzz, even here, that he is pro clean renewables. The record is the exact opposite.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  10. 10. wilbongo 09:28 AM 10/16/08

    Drill baby drill... urgh.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  11. 11. Ediot in reply to Eye144 02:54 PM 10/20/08

    Has CitizenRE actually performed any installations other than the photo op for Ed Begley's show? Last I heard they were supposed to have their manufacturing plant up and running by September, 2007. A recent query to their PR person revealed that, despite assurance by a sales rep at a local home show, they in fact did not have any plants up and running yet, and had not performed a single installation. Many have labeled this a pyramid scheme, and without substantiation in the form of testimonials (the site boasts more than 33,000 commitments), I'm inclined to believe the worst at this point.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  12. 12. RGG 08:36 PM 10/20/08

    Politics are the same on both (any) side of the border; lots of hot air but no teeth (read money/penalties) when it comes to real action after being elected. Whoever wins the race in the U.S. will face the same issues that exist today, and it is unlikely that either candidate will put the environment of tomorrow ahead of food (money/fat profits) on the table today.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  13. 13. 2008RealityCheck 06:23 PM 9/2/09

    Obama blocks drilling offshore US, then commits up to $10 billion of taxpayer money to help Brazil drill the offshore Tupi oil field. And China has signed a deal to get much of that non-Middle East oil.

    We could really use the hundreds of thousands of union oil industry jobs here in the US, and the $ trillions of oil income wouldn't hurt either.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  14. 14. PresidentDon 11:57 PM 9/20/09

    And the oil from Alaska is sold to Japan? Not in my back yard complainers, should have all the gas stations in their area closed. Everything comes from somebody's yard.
    Why do I keep getting the feelings that America is last. Sold to the lowest bidder, with poverty for all to come in 2010.
    51% voted for Change, well Change you got, change is all you'll have in your pocket if we do not Revolt, Re Vote now.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
  15. 15. PresidentDon 01:00 AM 9/21/09

    And the oil from Alaska is sold to Japan? Not in my back yard complainers, should have all the gas stations in their area closed. Everything comes from somebody's yard.
    Why do I keep getting the feelings that America is last. Sold to the lowest bidder, with poverty for all to come in 2010.
    51% voted for Change, well Change you got, change is all you'll have in your pocket if we do not Revolt, Re Vote now.

    Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Leave this field empty

Add a Comment

You must sign in or register as a ScientificAmerican.com member to submit a comment.
Click one of the buttons below to register using an existing Social Account.

More from Scientific American

See what we're tweeting about

Scientific American Editors

More »

Free Newsletters


Get the best from Scientific American in your inbox

Solve Innovation Challenges

Powered By: Innocentive

  SA Digital
  SA Digital

Science Jobs of the Week

Email this Article

Where Do the Presidential Candidates Stand on Environment and Energy?

X
Scientific American Magazine

Subscribe Today

Save 66% off the cover price and get a free gift!

Learn More >>

X

Please Log In

Forgot: Password

X

Account Linking

Welcome, . Do you have an existing ScientificAmerican.com account?

Yes, please link my existing account with for quick, secure access.



Forgot Password?

No, I would like to create a new account with my profile information.

Create Account
X

Report Abuse

Are you sure?

X

Institutional Access

It has been identified that the institution you are trying to access this article from has institutional site license access to Scientific American on nature.com. To access this article in its entirety through site license access, click below.

Site license access
X

Error

X

Share this Article

X