Hillary Clinton
unveils her plan to make US 'clean energy superpower'
A
day after announcing her opposition to the controversial Keystone XL pipeline,
Hillary Clinton unveiled a more comprehensive agenda for the US energy infrastructure
that seeks to transform the US into “the clean energy superpower of the 21st
century”.
The
Democratic presidential candidate detailed her proposals on Wednesday in both a
blogpost on Medium and a fact sheet distributed by Clinton’s campaign.
Clinton’s
plan calls for the existing energy infrastructure in the US to be modernized
through a series of steps, such as repairing or replacing oil and gas pipelines
that are outdated and risk both oil and methane leaks and other hazardous
accidents.
The
flaws highlighted by Clinton in the country’s energy infrastructure, including
pipeline spills, rail car explosions, and the exposure to cyber-attacks, mirror
the findings of the first-ever quadrennial energy review conducted by the Obama
administration and released in April.
In
addition to exposing the vulnerabilities in energy transmission, storage and
distribution infrastructure, the review produced recommendations that included
accelerating pipeline replacement, enhancing maintenance programs for natural
gas distribution systems, and developing a more modern electric grid.
Clinton
said her plan would invest in “grid security and resilience”, and create a
threat assessment team to protect against cyber-attack through improved
coordination.
Citing
challenges that extend across the borders of Canada and Mexico, Clinton also
said she would immediately begin negotiations with both nations, if elected
president, to forge a North American climate compact with the purpose of
producing shared targets and accountability measures to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and cut energy costs.
Such
a pact, Clinton wrote, would ensure that “all three countries demonstrate a
commitment to climate action,” as well as “[create] certainty for investors and
confidence in the future of our climate, so we can all marshal resources equal
to the challenges we face.”
Environmental
activists broadly approved of Clinton’s plan, while welcoming the series of
recent steps taken by the former secretary of state with respect to energy policy
– such as her opposition to Keystone.
Climatologist
Michael Mann, director of the Penn State Earth System Science Center, described
Clinton’s plan as “very good overall” while singling out her emphasis on
building upon the successes of the Obama administration – namely the
Environmental Protection Agency’s new rules to reduce greenhouse gas emissions,
known as the clean power plan.
He
also praised her outlined commitment to incentivizing clean energy, pricing
carbon emissions, and working with international partners in a coordinated
effort to lower carbon emissions.
Mann
nonetheless maintained that Clinton’s plan was “somewhat conservative” with
respect to fossil fuel subsidies.
“Clinton
indicates that she is open to the additional leasing of public lands to fossil
fuel companies, which – given the cheap nature of those leases – is effectively
a subsidy to fossil fuel interests,” he said, while acknowledging that Clinton
said she wanted to ensure “taxpayers get a fair deal”.
“The
devil is in the details here,” Mann said. “A fair deal would mean charging
fossil fuel companies for the damage that is being done by the additional
burning of fossil fuels in the form of climate change and its costly impact.
Even the fossil fuel industry estimates that to be least $60 per ton of carbon
burned.”
Tiernan
Sittenfeld, the senior vice-president of government affairs of the left-leaning
League of Conservation Voters, said she was pleased with what Clinton had
offered thus far and is optimistic about what is yet to come.
“Overall,
we’re increasingly excited about her leadership on clean energy and climate
change,” she said.
Linton’s
new plan, her opposition to both Keystone and Arctic drilling, as well as the
renewable energy proposal she rolled out in July, Sittenfeld said, were all
evidence of a ramp-up that placed the Democratic frontrunner squarely at odds
with her Republicans opponents.
“If
you think about the fact that protecting the environment used to be such a
source of bipartisan agreement and now pretty much every single Republican
candidate for president wants to permanently block the clean power plan …
climate deniers are running rampant amongst the Republicans running for
president,” she said. “It’s pretty disgraceful, unfortunately.”
Environmental
groups were especially jubilant on Tuesday, when Clinton finally made clear
that she opposed the controversial Keystone pipeline – after months of
declining to take a position.
“I
think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone pipeline as what I believe
it is, a distraction from the important work we have to do to combat climate
change, and unfortunately from my perspective one that interferes with our
ability to move forward to deal with all the other issues,” Clinton said during
a campaign stop in Des Moines, Iowa. “Therefore, I oppose it. And I oppose It
because I don’t think it’s in the best interest of what we need to do to combat
climate change.”
She
elaborated on her stance in the Medium post Wednesday, writing: “We shouldn’t
be building a pipeline dedicated to moving North America’s dirtiest fuel
through our communities .”
The
Keystone announcement earned immediate rebukes from Clinton’s Republican rivals
– such as former Florida governor Jeb Bush, who accused Clinton of favouring
“environmental extremists over US jobs”.
Reviews
have suggested the hotly debated pipeline would not, in fact, result in a
job-creating bonanza.
The
State Department estimated that only 35 permanent positions would be created,
while jobs for roughly 3,900 workers required to build the pipeline would last
for just a year. Estimates have also varied dramatically for the indirect jobs
that Keystone might add, and been lowered amid a drop in oil prices that has
reduced the economic viability of further tar sands expansion.
Among
the Republican presidential hopefuls, Marco Rubio is one of the few to lay out
his own energy agenda. The Florida senator pledged earlier this month to
immediately block the Obama administration’s rules on reducing greenhouse gas
emissions and also advocated for lifting a federal ban on crude oil exports.
Clinton
said last week she would support reversing the 40-year ban only if there were
concessions from the oil and gas industry toward cleaner energy.
“I’m
not against it under all circumstances but I have not yet seen any legislation
introduced that would strike the right balance, in my perspective,” Clinton
told reporters in New Hampshire.
Courtesy: The Guardian
