Los Angeles Times

Comparing their climate plans

Candidates’ proposals differ in how far, how fast, how much to spend

- By Evan Halper Times staff writer Melissa Gomez contribute­d to this report.

Each Democrat has a robust action agenda, but strategies do differ.

WASHINGTON —Wildfires, rising seas, and rollbacks by the Trump administra­tion that undermine California’s authority to pursue pioneering environmen­tal policies have put climate change top of mind for the state’s Democratic voters. Every one of the party’s presidenti­al candidates has a robust climate action agenda.

It is a rare area in this primary where candidates are marching mostly to the same beat. They almost universall­y support a Green New Deal. They all vow to immediatel­y reenlist the U.S. in the Paris accord to fight global warming.

Each of them would scrap all of the Trump rollbacks and set a firm deadline for moving the nation to net zero emissions, the point at which any greenhouse gas emissions caused by humans are balanced by carbon sinks in the environmen­t or technologi­es that remove carbon from the atmosphere.

The difference­s lie in how far, how fast and how much to spend. Are they calling for the phaseout of all fossil fuels by a certain date? Do they see nuclear energy as part of a zero-emissions future? Are they looking to immediatel­y ban fracking? We break down where they stand and what climate policy would look like under the vision offered by each of the Democratic hopefuls.

Joe Biden

Former Vice President Joe Biden unveiled a bold $1.7-trillion plan for climate action that belies his brand of “incrementa­l” progressiv­ism. He doesn’t go as far as some of his rivals, but the Biden vision is hardly incrementa­l.

During the Obama administra­tion, Biden was at the forefront of pushing the world to embrace bolder climate action and the Paris accord on global warming. Faced with a hostile Congress, the Obama White House moved forward with aggressive administra­tion actions aimed at cleaning up power plant emissions and moving the nation’s vehicle fleet toward significan­tly higher fuel efficiency.

Biden recognizes that the Obama plans were ambitious but also that merely picking up where the last Democratic administra­tion left off would not fully address the urgent warnings of climate scientists.

He is calling for much further-reaching action and arguing that his deep experience in diplomacy makes him uniquely qualified to reposition the U.S. as the world leader in confrontin­g global warming.

“On Day One, Biden will sign a series of new executive orders with unpreceden­ted reach that go well beyond the Obama-Biden administra­tion platform and put us on the right track,” the candidate’s plan vows.

Michael Bloomberg

Former New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg’s environmen­tal agenda, unlike those of many of his opponents, does not advocate for a ban on fracking and would establish a moratorium on, instead of a complete ban on, all new fossil fuel leases on federal land. The billionair­e has donated millions to environmen­tal groups such as the Sierra Club Foundation, and last year he partnered with the group to launch Beyond Carbon, an initiative that advocates for green policy changes.

In the 2017 book he cowrote, “Climate of Hope,” Bloomberg acknowledg­es that he isn’t a “stereotypi­cal” environmen­talist. “I don’t want to ban fracking ( just do it safely) or stop the Keystone pipeline (the oil is coming here one way or another) and I support nuclear power,” he wrote. But he said he wanted to fight climate change “to save and improve lives.”

His plan aims to cut emissions by 50% across the entire U.S. economy in 10 years and increase funding for research and developmen­t in clean energy and a clean grid to at least $25 billion each year. Bloomberg has not released an estimated cost of his entire climate change plan.

He has chafed at the massive spending linked to the Green New Deal plan as envisioned by its authors in Congress. He said in a speech in New Hampshire early last year, as the proposal was unveiled, that he is tired of “things that are pie in the sky, that we never are going to pass, are never going to afford.” He drafted his own, narrower Green New Deal proposal.

Tulsi Gabbard

The environmen­tal vision of U.S. Rep. Tulsi Gabbard of Hawaii is aggressive but also incomplete. Unlike most of her rivals, Gabbard has not presented a fleshed-out blueprint for climate action. But she has written a measure in Congress called the Off Fossil Fuels Act for a Better Future that would move the nation to 100% clean electricit­y and transporta­tion by 2035. It also would halt new fossil fuel projects and end some subsidies. The measure is enthusiast­ically endorsed by environmen­tal groups.

Gabbard has said she backs the Green New Deal and won’t support nuclear power as it exists now.

“I do not support ‘leaving the door open’ to nuclear power unless and until there is a permanent solution to the problem of nuclear waste,” Gabbard says on her website. “I believe we need to invest in 100% renewable and safe energy sources like wind, solar and geothermal.”

It is unclear how much government investment Gabbard would commit to a green energy transition. Her campaign’s lack of a detailed plan moved Greenpeace to call on her to “recommit” to taking a leadership role on climate in this race, as she has in Congress.

Amy Klobuchar

Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar is running as a moderate alternativ­e to the progressiv­e firebrands in the race. As such, her climate plans are more modest than those of some of her rivals.

Klobuchar seems to chafe at the multitrill­iondollar price tag and the radical transition­s mapped out in the Green New Deal as proposed by its original drafters. The government spending she talks about is in the hundreds of billions of dollars, not trillions. The senator says she supports the Green New Deal ideas more as things to aspire toward than as workable, concrete plans. She favors developmen­t of advanced nuclear energy technologi­es and pollution-capturing innovation­s that could allow a future for the coal industry in a green economy.

“As the granddaugh­ter of a miner who worked 1,500 feet undergroun­d, Sen. Klobuchar understand­s the hard work and sacrifice of those who built and powered our country,” her climate plan says. “She is committed to supporting and creating new opportunit­ies for workers and communitie­s that have depended on the fossil fuel industry.”

The Klobuchar agenda looks more like a resumption of the Obama-era climate policies than the shift toward the much more aggressive climate action that many candidates are promoting. But Klobuchar is also a longtime ally of climate activists and talks frequently on the stump about restoring the voice of science in federal decisionma­king and has written clean energy legislatio­n in the Senate.

Bernie Sanders

Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders prides himself on advancing the most farreachin­g and aggressive plans in several major policy areas. Climate is no exception.

The Sanders plan has the biggest price tag at $16.3 trillion over 15 years, the biggest expansion of government and the most ambitious targets. He sets an end date for fossil fuels. And the spending he outlines for investment in green technology, natural resource protection and expansions of public land dwarfs that proposed by any other candidate.

The blueprint most closely reflects the goals laid out in the Green New Deal as drafted by progressiv­e firebrand Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York and Sen. Edward J. Markey of Massachuse­tts.

Whereas other candidates talk about creating a few million jobs, Sanders is talking about 20 million. He is calling for cuts in military spending and “massive” tax hikes on fossil fuel income. There would be big investment­s in everything from high-speed rail to resiliency programs focused on such things as fighting wildfire and drought.

Sanders promises that “climate change will be factored into virtually every area of policy, from immigratio­n to trade to foreign policy and beyond.”

Elizabeth Warren

Massachuse­tts Sen. Elizabeth Warren’s climate plan is very much in step with her broader brand. It calls for big government investment and takes aim at what she says is corruption in the energy economy. “To really bend the curve on climate, we’ll need sustained big, structural change across a range of industries and sectors,” the plan says.

Warren was the first candidate to vow to stop new drilling on public land in the first day of her administra­tion, and she is an enthusiast­ic proponent of the Green New Deal. She was also the first candidate to sign the No Fossil Fuel Money Pledge, rejecting campaign contributi­ons from fossil fuel companies.

Warren argues that her broader anti-corruption plans will “end lobbying as we know it” and remove the clout fossil fuel companies hold over the nation’s energy policies.

Her investment in green energy is geared toward creating new union jobs in the sector. She vows to spend at least $3 trillion, with a third of it going to “front-line communitie­s” to “remediate” what she says are historic environmen­tal injustices.

 ?? Carolyn Cole Los Angeles Times ?? THE TOWN of Pacifica, just south of San Francisco, is fighting to defend its homes from coastal erosion. Rising seas and more intense wildfires have put climate change top of mind for the state’s Democratic voters.
Carolyn Cole Los Angeles Times THE TOWN of Pacifica, just south of San Francisco, is fighting to defend its homes from coastal erosion. Rising seas and more intense wildfires have put climate change top of mind for the state’s Democratic voters.
 ?? Wally Skalij Los Angeles Times ?? THE THOMAS fire reaches the 101 Freeway north of Ventura in late 2017 during an extremely dry season.
Wally Skalij Los Angeles Times THE THOMAS fire reaches the 101 Freeway north of Ventura in late 2017 during an extremely dry season.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States