Ask National Climate Campaign Director Steve Cochran About the Politics of Climate Change
October 7, 2008 | Posted by Heather Shelby in Uncategorized
Our National Climate Campaign Director, Steve Cochran, will take questions on the politics of climate change until Election Day, November 4th.
If you have a question for Steve Cochran, please pose it as a comment below and he will answer as many as possible by the end of the day on November 4th.
Thank you for your support and interest in the politics of climate change.
8 Responses
Comment from chris stepanian
October 9th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
Other than the President,how about the other races in my area? How do they stand on enviromental issues.
Comment from Dana Lobell
October 9th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
After the most recent presidential debate, NPR did a "fact checking" story about statements the candidates had made. One of their reporters said that Obama's idea to get us free of foreign oil in 10 years (closely mirroring the Gore plan) was not possible.
I was very disappointed to hear this from NPR (as opposed to Fox, where I would expect that kind of thinking!). But I'm not a scientist or an expert, so I don't know how reasonable the reporter's assumption was. What do you think – can we stop using foreign oil in 10 years? And if we can, how can we get that word out with scientific rigor so the media will pay attention and take it seriously>
Comment from heyroger
October 9th, 2008 at 4:13 pm
What is the EDF voting recommendation on California propositions:
#7 – Renewable energy generation?
#10 – Alternative fuel vehicles and
renewable energy. Bonds. Initiative
statute?
The Union of Concerned Scietists recommends NO on both because they are poorly written, favor natural gas, poor use of tax payer $$'s.
I'm a Clean & Green supporter and inclined to vote for everything that is professed to benefit our environment.
Thanks!
Comment from Steve Cochran
October 14th, 2008 at 3:14 pm
Chris Stepanian,
It is the policy of Environmental Defense and the Environmental Defense Action Fund to not get involved in electioneering. However, an excellent resource for you to find the answer to your question would be the League of Conservation Voters – http://www.lcv.org/.
Thank you,
Steve Cochran.
Comment from Steve Cochran
October 14th, 2008 at 3:53 pm
Dana,
There is value in setting a goal of getting off foreign oil and other carbon-based energy sources.
We believe that if we can pass legislation to cap and reduce America's global warming pollution, we can not only get the emissions reductions we need, but we can create market incentives to move us off carbon-based energy in a way that creates economic opportunities and jobs here at home.
One thing is for sure — the longer we wait to pass strong global warming legislation, the deeper the cuts will have to be in order to avoid the worst consequences of run-away global warming. Whether you're more inspired by the 10-year goal or by our effort to pass national legislation, we need national action now to move us forward.
Thank you,
Steve Cochran
Comment from D. Chander
October 28th, 2008 at 9:35 am
During debate #3, Barack Obama stated that he would "consider" drilling for oil in the US. Is he truly considering doing this ill-advised thing? Or was this just rhetoric to get elected since a certain percentage of the American public thinks this will help decrease our dependence on foreign oil? Either way, it leaves me with a queasy feeling.
Comment from Steve Cochran
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:23 pm
heyroger,
EDF is also opposed to Propositions 7 and 10.
Proposition 7 contains a "loophole" that allows companies to get credit for renewable contracts they sign, regardless of whether the power is actually produced and marketed. It limits the selling price of renewable power, eliminating key incentives for developers and investors. It also creates obstacles to siting new transmission lines that will be needed to bring renewable power to businesses and residential customers. For more information on Proposition 7, please visit http://www.noprop7.com.
Our concerns with Proposition 10 include the fact that it picks winners and losers among vehicle and fuel technologies rather than allowing market forces to drive innovation. It strongly favors natural gas over other sources, disadvantaging important technologies like heavy-duty hybrid trucks. It also costs Californians about $335 million annually for 30 years while not requiring reductions in smog or toxic air contaminants. For more information on Proposition 10, please visit http://www.noonproposition10.org.
Thank you,
Steve Cochran
Comment from Steve Cochran
November 3rd, 2008 at 1:31 pm
D. Chandler,
Due to the nature of Environmental Defense Fund, we cannot take part in electioneering and cannot comment on the exact plans of either of the candidates. You may want to get in touch with Barack Obama's campaign, or the League of Conservation Voters, who you can find here: http://lcv.org.
Thank you,
Steve Cochran.