- May 2013
- April 2013
- March 2013
- February 2013
- January 2013
- December 2012
- November 2012
- October 2012
- September 2012
- August 2012
- July 2012
- June 2012
- May 2012
- April 2012
- March 2012
- February 2012
- January 2012
- December 2011
- November 2011
- October 2011
- September 2011
- August 2011
- July 2011
- June 2011
- May 2011
- April 2011
- March 2011
- February 2011
- January 2011
- December 2010
- November 2010
- October 2010
- September 2010
- August 2010
- July 2010
- June 2010
- May 2010
- April 2010
- March 2010
- February 2010
- January 2010
- December 2009
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
August 2012 Archives
Updated at 6 p.m. Thursday, August 23.
What do the energy and environment policies of President Obama and presumptive GOP nominee Mitt Romney bode for the country?
On the campaign trail, Obama and Romney have been seeking to differentiate themselves on areas of energy policy, especially coal and wind power. Obama underscores the economic importance of creating--and sustaining--jobs in clean-energy industries, while Romney charges that Obama is picking winners and losers by subsidizing different industries and maintains that the government should, by and large, stay out of the business of backing certain energy technologies. Obama insists he supports coal as long as it's produced in cleaner way than it is right now, while Romney--who once held a position on coal similar to Obama's--now blames the president for job losses in the coal industry. Meanwhile, neither one of them talks much about environmental regulations or global warming.
Romney unveiled a comprehensive energy plan on Thursday, August 23, which expands oil and natural gas production and gives states authority for drilling on federal lands. The Obama campaign maintained that the plan didn't amount to anything more than continuing to subsidize the oil industry.
Election sound bites aside, what do the positions articulated by the two candidates say about how they would govern? What parts of the energy and environment landscape could drastically change depending on who wins in November? Or, do presidential administrations not make a sizable impact on energy and environment policies?
Regardless of who wins the White House, what should the next president prioritize in these areas?
14 responses: Michael Wu, Manik Roy, Bernard L. Weinstein, Brigham McCown, Carl Pope, Victor Gilinsky, Amy Harder, Gene Karpinski, Michael Schmidt, Kevin Massy, William O'Keefe, Christine Todd Whitman, Evan Tracey, Scott Sklar
Which energy and environment policies garner bipartisan support? And what's holding Washington back from acting on them?
Numerous bills pending before Congress have widespread support from Democrats and Republicans in both chambers, including bills on energy efficiency, natural gas-powered vehicles, and toxic-chemicals reform. Yet even popular measures like these remain stalled.
What other measures have attracted broad, bipartisan support? What's holding back all these measures? Is there any common thread? What can Washington do to make progress on these issues while it remains gridlocked over more divisive issues, such as climate change and offshore oil and gas drilling?
10 responses: Amy Harder, Christine McEntee, Barry Russell, Amy Harder, William O'Keefe, David Holt, Brigham McCown, Christine Todd Whitman, Kate Offringa, Bernard L. Weinstein
Should Congress extend the production tax credit for wind energy or let it expire at year's end?
Debate over the wind industry's key tax credit has heated up over the past week as presumptive Republican presidential nominee Mitt Romney came out in opposition to the policy and President Obama doubled down on his commitment to it. The production tax credit's fate was a moving target last week, leading up to a Senate Finance Committee markup of broader tax-extenders legislation.
While the Senate bill won't go anywhere right now, the latest bout of legislative uncertainty surrounding the PTC foreshadows the heated debate the likely debate to come in both chambers of Congress on the policy once the time for the real decision-making comes during the lame-duck session.
What economic and environmental factors should Washington consider in deciding whether to extend the tax credit? What does this debate foretell for subsidies for solar, nuclear, and other sources of energy? Will the PTC's fate hinge on presidential politics, as some experts have suggested?
27 responses: Amy Harder, Brent Erickson, Eileen Claussen, Phyllis Cuttino, Brigham McCown, Daniel Simmons, Gene Karpinski, Catrina Rorke, Rep. Earl Blumenauer, D-Ore., Kate Offringa, Josh Freed, Kevin Knobloch, Craig Rucker, Rhone Resch, Benjamin Zycher, Michael Brune, Carl Pope, Alex Trembath, William O'Keefe, Eli Hinckley, Lisa Jacobson, Tom Wolf, Bill Dickenson, Denise Bode, Howard A. Learner, Tyson Slocum, Scott Sklar
