The nation is already beginning to transition to cleaner energy, and how that shift is handled and leveraged is up to the next administration, a panel of experts said during a Washington Post panal discussion Tuesday on the sidelines of the Democratic National Convention in Philadelphia. “None of this is going to be easy, transitions are never easy,” said Trevor Houser, energy policy adviser for Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton.
A transition from “dirty” fossil fuel sources is going to hit areas of the country that have built their economies on those industries the hardest, Houser said. However, he added, many of those areas are working to address the coming change in the nation’s energy landscape. Traveling with the Clinton campaign, Houser said he saw communities “who know we’re not going to go back to the 1940s level of coal employment in central Appalachia, despite what Donald Trump promises. … People in those communities are actively trying to build a diversified economic future.”
Trump, the Republican candidate for president, has promised throughout his campaign to revive the coal industry, which has been hurt by low natural gas prices and increased regulation. “Look, the coal industry, and I know it’s a big industry here, the coal industry’s going to make a very big comeback,” he told a crowd in Louisville, Ky. in early March.
The 2016 GOP platform throws its support behind coal, which it says is “an abundant, clean, affordable, reliable domestic energy resource.” The platform boasts party support for all fuel sources, but says they should be supported by the market without subsidies.
Denying that the nation is in the middle of an energy transition does no favors to coal communities, Houser said, which is why Clinton has released a plan to “revitalize” those communities. She has an unwavering commitment to those communities despite the fact that most coal states did not vote for her in the primary, most coal states are probably not going to vote for her in the general election. She’s committed to be the president of all Americans whether they vote for her or not, and this is an issue she’s pretty passionate about,” he said.
Rep. Tony Cardenas (D-Calif.) criticized the GOP’s treatment of climate change in Congress. “Whenever somebody leads with something as ridiculous as ‘I’m not a scientist, therefore, I have no basis to actually delve into this matter,’ … beware that that is not a responsible statement, and that is not a responsible Congress,” he said.
In contrast, the Democratic platform is the most progressive, including on matters of climate change and energy, that the party has ever adopted. It stresses the need to increase renewable energy generation and cut carbon emissions, and supports the introduction of a carbon tax.
Clinton’s support for a carbon tax is not as clear, as Houser dodged questions on whether the former secretary of state would work to implement such a tax. “We’re delighted to have produced the most ambitious climate platform in the party’s history,” Houser said, repeating a statement he made earlier in the panel. “[The platform] includes lots of tools to reduce carbon pollution, which is important because there’s no magic lever. It’s going to take lots of tools, and carbon pricing is an important lever to have in that tool box.”
However, he went on, “I’m sure if Congress wants to have a conversation about addressing climate change Secretary Clinton would be delighted to have that conversation.”
Having that conversation in Congress is no simple task, Cardenas said: “Right now when you look at the controlling party in both houses, they don’t want to have a discussion on it. They just want to say no, there’s no discussion, and to me, that’s not progress.”
