Democrats’ energy proposals may be too pricey for some

Democratic presidential candidates want the American people to know that they are taking the threat of global climate change seriously. More seriously, in fact, than even former president Barack Obama or 2016 nominee Hillary Clinton.

As a recent Vox analysis notes, the Democratic Party has rapidly pivoted away from the Obama administration’s much-touted “all-of-the-above energy strategy.” That meant simultaneously pursuing multiple goals: Energy independence, improved energy efficiency, expanded use of safer and cleaner carbon sources like natural gas, and investing in renewable energy for the future.

Not anymore. Gone are the days of Clinton’s moderate campaign promises of more “safe and responsible fossil fuel production,” replaced by 2020 candidates embracing her extreme anti-carbon rhetoric of “putting a lot of coal miners and coal companies out of business.”

For example, the Democrats’ 2020 frontrunner, former vice president Joe Biden, is considered a moderate. And yet he calls his comprehensive 22-page climate policy a “Plan for a Green Energy Revolution and Environmental Justice.” It certainly doesn’t sound moderate. Perhaps because it’s not.

Biden’s plan would cost a total of $6.7 trillion, and demand “net zero greenhouse gas emissions” by 2050. Spending more than the entire current federal budget and shutting down the carbon energy sector is hardly “moderate.”

Unless you compare Biden’s approach to his fellow 2020 candidates.

Vermont senator (and self-described socialist) Bernie Sanders wants to wage war against the fossil fuel industry, declaring it’s “destroying the planet.” Sanders’ plan would ban nuclear energy, offshore drilling, fracking, and any extracting of coal, natural gas, oil and tar sands on federally owned lands. Like Washington governor Jay Inslee, Sanders has suggested treating carbon energy companies like criminals and potentially prosecuting them for doing business.

“We’ve got to ask ourselves a simple question: What do you do with an industry that knowingly, for billions of dollars in short-term profits, is destroying this planet?” Sanders said during the July Democratic presidential debate. “I say that is criminal activity that cannot be allowed to continue.”

The U.S. Energy Information Administration projects that in 2050, 78.5 percent of U.S. energy production will still come from traditional fossil fuel sources.

Setting aside pricey social programs included in the Democrats’ energy policies, even the friendliest analysis pegs the cost of switching the U.S. economy entirely to green energy at $18 trillion to $20 trillion. And that’s just a start. More expensive renewables will have a continuing effect on household budgets across America. A new study from the Heartland Institute estimates that conservatively, the Green New Deal would add a permanent recurring cost of $37,454 to the average New Hampshire household every single year.

Polling shows that Americans care about the environment and are looking for serious proposals to address climate issues. At the same time, polls show Americans don’t want to put their fellow citizens out of work, and they are also unwilling to pay significantly more in their monthly utility bills in the war on climate change.

Pushing for all these energy policies simultaneously may be pushing swing voters away from the next Democratic nominee for president.