When it came to light that I would need to write about energy this week, the idea appealed to me about as much as going forward with the presidential debate tomorrow night seems to appeal to John McCain. But one thing I love about blogging, and BlogHer, is that I expose myself to and others expose me to notions and topics out of my comfort zone. 

That said, before anyone tries to compare me to lipstick or a pig (especially just a few days before Rosh Hashana no less), I hope you'll give this post, and Barack Obama's comprehensive energy proposal a fair shake, because frankly, despite the importance of the presidential foreign policy debate scheduled for tomorrow night and the fiscal emergencies that our country is now owning up to at the federal level (living in Ohio, I can assure you we've been living fiscal emergencies of this nature for literally months if not years now between payday loansharks, predatory mortgage lenders, foreclosure proceedings, job losses and corporate HQ departures), energy is now arguably at the center of foreign policy, energy and pretty much every other concern we have.  More on that toward the bottom of the post.

The Obama/Biden website provides us with a written explanation of his energy plan, a link to the plan itself (a pdf) and a video of his 30 minute speech about energy which he gave in Lansing, Michigan on August 4. The essentials of the plan, as outlined, are:

• Provide short-term relief to American families facing pain at the pump
• Help create five million new jobs by strategically investing $150 billion over the next ten years
  to catalyze private efforts to build a clean energy future.
• Within 10 years save more oil than we currently import from the Middle East and Venezuela
  combined.
• Put 1 million Plug-In Hybrid cars -- cars that can get up to 150
  miles per gallon -- on the road by 2015, cars that we will work to make
  sure are built here in America.
• Ensure 10 percent of our electricity comes from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by
  2025.
• Implement an economy-wide cap-and-trade program to reduce greenhouse gas emissions 80 percent by 2050.

If the general topic of "Energy" seems like too high a wattage to face in one glance at the very thorough campaign website page, check out Science Debate 2008. They asked Obama and GOP presidential candidate John McCain to respond to 14 science-oriented questions - and respond they did (Obama on 8/30/08 and McCain on 9/15/08). You can read all of Obama's answers here, including one on climate change, but here's his response to the question about energy:

[Science Debate 2008 question] Energy. Many policymakers and scientists say energy security and sustainability are major problems facing the United States this century. What policies would you support to meet demand for energy while ensuring an economically and environmentally sustainable future?

[Obama response] America's challenges in providing secure, affordable energy while addressing climate change mean that we must make much more efficient use of energy and begin to rely on new energy sources that eliminate or greatly reduce greenhouse gas emissions. My programs focus both on a greatly expanded program of federally funded energy research and development and on policies designed to speed the adoption of innovative energy technologies and stimulate private innovation.

First, I have proposed programs that, taken together, will increase federal investment in the clean energy research, development, and deployment by $150 billion over ten years. This research will cover:

• Basic research to develop alternative fuels and chemicals;

• Equipment and designs that can greatly reduce energy use in residential and commercial buildings - both new and existing;

• New vehicle technologies capable of significantly reducing our oil consumption;

• Advanced energy storage and transmission that would greatly help the economics of new electric-generating technologies and plug-in hybrids;

• Technologies for capturing and sequestering greenhouse gases produced by coal plants; and

• A new generation of nuclear electric technologies that address cost, safety, waste disposal, and proliferation risks.

I will also work closely with utilities to introduce a digital smart grid that can optimize the overall efficiency of the nation's electric utility system, by managing demand and making effective use of renewable energy and energy storage.

Second, it is essential that we create a strong, predictable market for energy innovations with concrete goals that speed introduction of innovative products and provide a strong incentive for private R&D investment in energy technologies. These concrete goals include:

• Increasing new building efficiency by 50 percent and existing building efficiency by 25 percent over the next decade, and taking other steps that will reduce the energy intensity of our economy 50 percent by 2030;

• Increasing fuel economy standards 4 percent per year and providing loan guarantees for domestic auto plants and parts manufacturers to build new fuel- efficient cars domestically;

• Extending the Production Tax Credit for five years and creating a federal Renewable Portfolio Standard that will require that 10 percent of American electricity be derived from renewable sources by 2012, and 25 percent by 2025; and

• Ensuring that regulations and incentives in all federal agencies support the national energy and environmental goals in ways that encourage innovation and ingenuity.

I will also encourage communities around the nation to design and build sustainable communities that cut energy use with walkable community designs and expanded investment in mass transit.

In regard to the content of Obama's August 4 energy speech, none other than oilman T. Boone Pickens, of his own Pickens Plan for energy, had this praise to offer:

“I’m strongly encouraged by Senator Obama’s speech on America’s
energy future. Foreign oil is killing our economy and putting our
nation at risk.

“When I started this campaign my goal was to make this the biggest
issue in the coming election and the top priority to be addressed in
the first hundred days of the next administration. This issue is
clearly moving up in the priority of political debate; Senator Obama’s
statement is an indication that is what is indeed happening.

But not everyone was as enthused by all that Obama had to say on energy. PunditMom, in her post, "Barack, Listen to Nancy Pelosi on Off-Shore Oil Drilling," writes: 

For me, some things shouldn't be up for compromise and the possibility
of having oil slicks up and down the East and West coasts just to
assuage the majority of voters who claim they support off-shore
drilling isn't one of them, especially when it's a false remedy.

Barack,
please don't tell us you're OK with the possibility of black goo
washing up on our beaches for the sake of a few votes and and no real
help with our gas prices and oil addiction.

There's a time for
compromise in politics, but there's also a time for standing one's
ground. I was hoping that you would feel that the environment was the
former.

[The House passed legislation yesterday that would allow for the ban to expire on Sept. 30.  It will expire because language that would have extended the ban was omitted as part of a compromise.  This means that neither Obama nor McCain will have to vote on extending the ban, but if they wanted the ban, they would have to move to amend the spending bill involved in order to try to extend it.]

Also in regard to the speech, Mom to Gio posted about how then just-Governor of Alaska Sarah Palin commented on Obama's energy speech, just four weeks before she was anointed to be the GOP's vice presidential nominee:

Governor Sarah Palin today responded to the energy plan put forward
by the presumptive Democratic nominee for President, Illinois Senator
Barack Obama.

“I am pleased to see Senator Obama acknowledge the huge potential
Alaska’s natural gas reserves represent in terms of clean energy and
sound jobs,” Governor Palin said. “The steps taken by the Alaska State
Legislature this past week demonstrate that we are ready, willing and
able to supply the energy our nation needs.”

Unfortunately for Alaska and other interested parties, on this past Tuesday, Senator John Thune (R-SD), one of five Republicans and five Democrats who make up the bi-partisan Gang of 10 that is seeking to pass comprehensive energy legislation, stated that the groups efforts are on hold until after the elections.

Which brings us back to this: given that a survey released today indicates that energy is the number one concern of Americans, how is it that energy is placed on the back burner? From the survey announcement:

Consumers United for Energy Solutions (CUES) today released a national survey showing most voters want Congress to address high energy prices by enacting a bold energy policy derived from the political center. At the National Press Club, the grassroots coalition also previewed the next steps in its national campaign to spur pro-consumer action from Congress on energy.

In the survey of registered voters for CUES, Peter Hart Research Associates found that most Americans not only expect Washington to act on energy, but most prefer a bipartisan approach with solutions from both parties. A plurality of 42% said they fall between the two parties on energy policy and want to see action on bipartisan proposals that will lead to more energy efficiency, conservation, renewable energy production and oil and gas drilling -- rather than continued bickering over Democratic and Republican bills. This compared with 28% who said they generally sided with the Democrats on energy and 24% who generally side with Republicans.

The poll is the latest to show energy is the No. 1 issue for voters: 43% said it will be the most important issue they will consider when voting, followed by health care (33%), the Iraq war (25%), foreign policy (23%) and job creation (22%).

Is it because it's so far-reaching a topic?  Obama's outlines and explanations indicate the great detail and thought he has put into solving this multi-faceted concern we lump into the category of "energy." He clearly is ready and eager to tackle it.

It's been suggested to me by a blogger in NE Ohio named Bill Callahan, whom those of us in the Ohio political blogosphere fondly call "the utility blogger," that the primacy of energy, as far as government action goes, depends upon which set of glasses you pick up to see it: the climate change/gobal warming glasses (meaning you care about quaity of life and more long-term issues) or the what is the gas price today glasses.  Right now, the latter pair of glasses are on, and we can see that in how that energy legislation had to cede to the Wall Street bailout (money, pocketbook, jobs, transportation as opposed to pollution, water quality, alternative sources, conservation) but posts like this one from The Asthma Mom shows us just how entangled the subcategories of concerns under the rubric of "energy" can be (but note her "Obama '08" button in the sidebar):

And with all the Democratic infighting over race, experience,
honesty, hope, rhetoric, and any other topic you can throw into the
mix, I don’t read or hear the candidates talking about their plans for
global warming much anymore. That probably won’t change with a secure
nomination, either, because the national race will likely focus on Iraq
and our ever-plummeting economy.

I’m concerned about all those issues, too, but I don’t want them to
obscure the topic of climate change and the very real problems it poses
for human health. I think asthma parents and patients in particular,
have a responsibility to keep global warming on the national—really the
international—agenda. World Health Day and National Public Health Week are doing it, but we should, too.

Here’s the thing. I’ve noticed too many parents of asthmatics
consider climate change someone else’s problem. Okay, yes. Technically
it’s everyone’s problem, or it will be, but right now kids
like ours stand to suffer the most from the increased smog/ozone
pollution that will result.

Luckily, I have no doubt that the overarching issue of Energy, with a capital E, will come back to boil again. And, as we've seen this week, if there is one candidate whom we can trust to keep an eye on multiple pressing and complicated issues at the same time, and who is willing to debate, and work as needed on the Wall Street bailout, and continue to campaign, then it seems to me that that candidate - Barack Obama - is the one who offers the greatest chance to succeed at tackling our country's energy and energy-related issues.

RELATED LINKS:

Amanda Scott at My Barack Obama: Barack Obama's comments at the Clinton Global initiative (9/25/08)

Kate Sheppard at Gristmill: Beaming Barack at CGI

Catherine Morgan at Political Voices of Women: Barack Obama's Speech on Energy