Should the U.S. go so far as to stop selling fossil fuels on the global market just as it nears toppling Saudi Arabia as the world’s leading oil exporter? A handful of 2020 Democratic presidential hopefuls say yes.
The roughly 20-strong field looking to beat President Donald Trump next year aligns in its plans to rejoin a Paris Climate Agreement that includes leading U.S. allies, and most candidates want to end new fossil-fuel leasing on public lands. Widening the lens, however, their environmental proposals reveal key differences, and not just when it comes to U.S. oil, where to find it and how to sell it.
“One area where candidates overwhelmingly agree (15 candidates) is ending new leases for fossil-fuel development on federal lands. Investors should take note because this is something that a president can do unilaterally, without congressional approval,” says James Lucier, who leads the energy, environmental and tax practices at Capital Alpha.
Read: UN chief warns of ‘dramatic climate emergency’ as G-7 pledges $20 million for Amazon fire
Federal lands offshore and onshore currently produce 13% of U.S. natural gas and 24% of U.S. oil CL.1, +0.65% . U.S. crude oil exports will nearly double to 9 million barrels a day by 2024, the International Energy Agency forecasts. That’s enough to surpass Russian shipments and threatens to overtake Saudi exports. But the U.S. should be investing in alternative energy sources, not pouring oil onto the global market, say early poll leaders Sen. Bernie Sanders and Sen. Elizabeth Warren, along with Sen. Cory Booker and select others.
Capital Alpha
Less than a third of the field have put a price tag on their climate-change ideas — although count Warren, Booker, former Vice President Joe Biden and Sen. Kirsten Gilliband among those that have. How exactly they’ll fund ambitious environmental fixes will have to be hammered out as the group narrows.
About half of the field is backing a “Green New Deal” that has already been factoring into the election conversation; some are adding their own features to the pact rolled out by Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and other members of Congress earlier this year. Sanders, Gillibrand, Sen. Kamala Harris, Warren, Booker, and Sen. Amy Klobuchar all signed off on the Green New Deal legislation.
Future Returns: What would the Green New Deal mean to investors?
Following the lead of major states such as California and New York, the candidates with the more advanced plans are moving to endorse features of the Green New Deal, such as a 100%-clean-electricity goal (10 candidates of the 19 tracked by Lucier and Capital Alpha) and a net-zero emissions target by 2050 (nine candidates). Many other candidates have been vocal supporters of the deal, which is at least as much a job-creation bill as climate-protection bill.
Surprisingly, few candidates (only four) lead with an explicit carbon price — a cost applied to carbon pollution to encourage polluters to reduce the amount of greenhouse gases they emit into the atmosphere. Most candidates are choosing emissions targets instead as a means of stopping ozone depletion. Those that favor a carbon price do generally have less developed policies than those who follow a Green New Deal approach. Still, a majority of candidates are at least open to a carbon price, notes Lucier. Entrepreneur Andrew Yang, out with his $5 trillion proposal Monday, plays up the use of nuclear energy more than his competition.
The Democratic National Committee, by a vote of 222-137, last week ruled against allowing a climate-only debate that former climate-focused 2020 candidate Gov. Jay Inslee and activists had pushed for. Inslee has since announced his withdrawal from the presidential race to run again for Washington governor. On Sept. 4, in New York, CNN will host a candidate town hall on climate policy for select candidates.
Opinion: How to make sure your ESG fund does what you think it does
Using the candidates’ own proposals and analysis from Capital Alpha, here’s a snapshot of climate-policy positions among the higher-polling names or those who have made climate change a particular priority. Not all candidates are included, nor are the highlights exhaustive of each candidate’s environmental proposals to date.
Biden: The Obama administration’s vice president wants 100% clean energy and net-zero emissions by 2050. He’ll work with other major international carbon-emitting nations to create enforceable pacts, he says. He’ll advance a $1.7 trillion federal investment and $5 trillion total public-private spending on climate initiatives.
Sanders: The long-serving Vermont senator, who considers himself a Democratic Socialist, will push for the end of exports of coal, natural gas and crude oil, while phasing out nuclear energy. He recently detailed a $16 trillion climate plan that builds on the Green New Deal.
Warren: The Massachusetts senator will spend $2 trillion over 10 years in green research, manufacturing and exporting; $1.5 trillion of federal energy product procurement over 10 years; and $100 billion in foreign aid for clean-energy deployment. She’ll ban new fossil-fuel leases offshore and on public lands and will regulate companies to disclose climate risks. Warren has said corruption and lobbying are big obstacles to U.S. action on climate change.
Harris: The California senator is so far light on a climate-specific plan, at least one that details spending, but her climate-focused state keeps her in the spotlight. She has included a climate cooperation pledge as part of foreign policy that she says will restore U.S. footing with allies. As senator, she has co-introduced legislation to block efforts to roll back fuel-emissions standards by the Trump administration.
Read: Trump is reportedly working to prevent more automakers from California emissions rollback defection
Booker: The Newark mayor-turned-New Jersey senator will ban fracking. He’ll triple the Superfund tax and increase fees on coal mine operators to fund environmental cleanups. He’ll also ban U.S. crude-oil exports. Clean-energy promotion will feature in a planned $1.7 trillion in federal investment and $5 trillion in total investment.
Klobuchar: The Minnesota senator hasn’t yet been explicit in her climate plans, at least to the degree of her competitors, the Capital Alpha analysis finds. She is a Green New Deal backer. She will reinstate tougher CAFE standards, the Corporate Average Fuel Economy regulations, which determine auto fuel efficiency, as well as a clean-power plan.
Gillibrand: The upstate New York senator will look to spend a combined $10 trillion in public and private funding on climate initiatives over a decade, paid for in part by a proposed $100 billion tax on fossil-fuel production. She’ll push for trade negotiations to include environmental provisions. She also gets more specific than most candidates on carbon, including: net-zero carbon and greenhouse gas emissions by 2050; 100% clean, renewable, zero-carbon electricity by 2030; and setting a $52/metric ton carbon price.
Yang: In his $5 trillion “Lower Emissions, Higher Ground” plan released Aug. 26, Yang says he would allow the U.S. to achieve net-zero emissions by the middle of the century. His plan includes: a transition away from fossil fuels to renewable energy and upgrading infrastructure and farming practices; moving populations to higher ground; researching the removal of carbon from the atmosphere, including using “space mirrors” to deflect sunlight. Compared to climate-change plans from most other candidates, Yang’s would focus on keeping nuclear energy. He didn’t say exactly how he’d pay for the $5 trillion proposal, although a carbon tax is included.
South Bend, Ind., Mayor Pete Buttigieg: Mayor Pete’s proposals call for a carbon tax-and-dividend plan — taxing polluters and distributing that revenue as a dividend for individuals — as well as no new drilling on public lands. He’ll explore carbon capture and he’ll push for collaboration with other countries to create climate goals more ambitious than the Paris agreement.
Former Texas Congressman Beto O’Rourke: The oil-country politician would provide no new fossil-fuel leases and would change the royalties that oil and gas companies pay taxpayers for pumping from public lands to reflect the greater demands of climate change. He too looks to surpass the Paris agreement, in 2030 and after.
And: Where the 2020 candidates stand on student debt and college affordability
Add Comment