Andrew Revkin of the New York Times has a good article today comparing the climate change policies of the two US Presidential candidates.  Here’s a capsule summarization of the main differences:

  • Both are proponents of a cap-and-trade system for carbon emissions, but differ in their goals.  Obama wants a reduction of 80% below 1990 levels by 2050.  McCain wants a 60% reduction.  Obama’s target is in line with the growing scientific consensus that 80% global reduction is required to stave off the most hazardous scenarios.  It is also in line with targets announced by Britain last week.
  • Obama wants to auction emissions credits.  McCain seems to want to give them away with possible auction in the future.  Obama will use a portion of the proceeds earned from the auction to fund his venture capital scheme that encourages private sector development of renewable energy technologies.
  • McCain wants to build 45 nuclear reactors by 2030.  Obama wants to shift to renewable energy sources, with a goal of 25% of the country’s energy coming from renewables by 2025.  The 25% by 2025 threshold has been adopted in Great Britain.  The RAND Corporation recently completed a study on how the US would get to this point (namely, through wind and biofuels).
  • Both candidates are committed to the UN process for developing a successor to the Kyoto Protocol–although the key preliminary discussions are taking place in December, so Bush’s climate curmudgeons will be leading the US delegation.  Nevertheless, there will be ample opportunity for the new US president to shape the talks as the final agreement is targeted for completion in December, 2009.

In sum, Obama is in line with most of the industrialized world on climate policy.  McCain is lagging behind.  Additionally, the fact that his running mate (who McCain describes as “one of the foremost experts in this nation on energy issues”) is an anti-science climate change denier and that he wants to put her in charge of energy policy suggests his lack of commitment to the issue.