The LA Times has been writing a series of "Position Papers" for the candidates, and today's was on Energy. Under the subhead
Neither nuclear nor 'clean coal' will solve the crisis.they wrote:
. . . That's why it's doubly disappointing that neither Barack Obama nor John McCain has a responsible energy plan. In pandering to voters in swing states, both have backed dangerous, dirty energy sources in contradiction of their own principles.The editorial goes on to excoriate McCain on his plan to build 59 more nuclear plants, and concludes that
The United States gets nearly half of its electricity from coal-fired plants. These plants account for about a third of the nation's emissions of carbon dioxide, the prime contributor to global warming. They are also a top source of other air pollutants, such as sulfur dioxide, and worldwide they are the No. 1 source of deadly mercury pollution. You can't pretend to be a crusader against climate change and pollution, as both candidates do, while favoring expanded coal use -- yet Obama and McCain waste few opportunities to declare their support for “clean coal.” If by this they mean they want more research into pumping coal emissions underground, good for them. But the voters in coal-producing states such as West Virginia interpret the candidates' rhetoric as an endorsement of increased mining and burning of coal using existing processes that are anything but clean, and Obama and McCain have done nothing to disabuse them of that notion.
a big part of the next president's job will be trying to reseed the scorched earth left behind by the current one.Thank you, LA Times! I hope the candidates heed your message!