How to Choose an Energy Plan

My Advice: When comparison shopping the McCain energy plan  vs. the Obama energy plan, it's easy to get lost in the details. In fact, on the surface, they are surprisingly similar. Reduce foreign oil dependence - check.  Clean Coal - check.  Renewable Energy - check. It's all there in both plans. But look deeper, the differences are in the priorities, and the philosophies.

Let's face it, one of the main reasons the energy issue is receiving so much attention in this election year is due the recent spike in gas prices.  The soaring prices combined with other economic challenges set off fear in the American people, and suddenly the need for "energy independence" became priority number one. Energy independence of course is really targeted at reducing our dependence on foreign oil, and under the McCain/Palin plan, specifically oil that comes from "countries that don't like us very much".  Now it's hard to disagree with that concept, but it does suggest that our dependency on oil is not really the problem, it's only a problem when we get it from countries that hate us. I believe that is the cornerstone of the McCain/Palin energy plan. Unfortunately, if that is what is seen as the problem, it follows that the solution will be targeted toward replacing the "bad oil" with "good oil", and that's why the McCain/Palin energy plan is focusing its efforts chiefly on domestic drilling. 

As I've said before, energy decisions cannot be made in a vacuum. A comprehensive energy plan must address impacts on the environment, economy and foreign policy. A one-sided approach cannot work, whether it's skewed toward fixing ONLY the economy and foreign policy woes, such as the "drill baby drill" plan, or if we address ONLY the environment.  There is a lot of hype about "going green" and converting to "renewable energy sources". Again, it's hard to argue with that logic, the only problem is, if you really understand where we are as a country with our energy usage, you just can't get there from here anytime soon. 

Let's look at some quick facts to illustrate the above point.

United States energy usage in a nutshell:

By Source:
39.8% - Petroleum
23.6% - Natural Gas
22.8% - Coal
6.8% - Renewable Energy
8.4% - Nuclear Electric Power

One very important fact to note: when you break down where these different sources of energy are allocated, 70% of petroleum products go to transportation. Transportation accounts for 29% of our total energy usage and 96% of it comes from petroleum.

Most of our renewable energy (51%) gets converted into electricity and fuels the electric power grids. Only a very small amount of renewable energy (9%) goes to transportation, which accounts for only 2% of our transportation usage.

If you examine the candidate's position on energy, and I encourage you to do so, you will see that they both have plans that propose to reduce our dependence on foreign oil and invest in clean energy for the future. That's the good news.

The confusing part is figuring out how they plan to do it, and which plan is more closely aligned with your views. Both plans appear similar on the surface, however there are some significant differences on how each candidate proposes to reduce our dependency on foreign oil. McCain seems to favor domestic drilling. Obama's energy plan is organized by short-term and mid to long-term solutions. One short-term fix involves releasing some light oil from the Strategic Petroleum Reserve in order to reduce gas prices. The second step involves reducing oil consumption in order to cut imports. This is a distinct difference; reduce consumption rather than replace it with domestic oil drilling. Obama does endorse domestic drilling where it has already been approved but has not yet happened, as well as limited approval for new domestic drilling. McCain's plan for alternative energy seems heavily weighted toward nuclear power, with an aggressive plan to construct 45 new Nuclear Power plants by 2050, with an ultimate goal of constructing 100 new plants. Obama's alternative energy plan is weighted toward diversifying sources of electricity, including nuclear, but expresses concern with some of our nuclear waste storage techniques that need to be addressed.   With regard to renewable energy sources as a whole, Obama supports a Renewable Portfolio Standard  or RPS of 10%, which would set a Federal Mandate that 10% of all consumed energy would be from renewable sources by the year 2012.  McCain does not support a mandate, but would encourage renewable energy by offering tax incentives.  Both candidates have plans for getting that electricity to translate to the transportation sector in the form of development and implementation of more hybrid vehicles. In this case, Obama's plan seems more aggressive in terms of timeline and number of vehicles, calling for 1 million plug-in electric vehicles on the road by 2015, as well as a $7,000 tax credit to those who purchase hybrid vehicles .  McCain's plan focuses on what he refers to as "Clean Car Challenge" which is a $300 million dollar prize for the development of a battery that is superior to those currently being used, and would offer a $5,000 tax credit incentive to encourage consumers to purchase hybrid vehicles.  Both candidates have a fairly good record on the environment.  Both McCain and Obama have been accused of flip-flopping with regard to domestic drilling. 

A major difference I noticed in the plans has nothing to do with the different types of energy. I discovered an interesting, almost philosophical difference, and that is that throughout the Obama plan, he references the responsibilities of the citizens of the United States that are necessary for us to realize our energy goals. The McCain plan is structured in a way that says what John McCain believes to be the solution, and what his government will do. I think this difference is extremely important in that it shows Obama's grasp on the reality that the government can create whatever programs it wants to, but without the support and the commitment of the American people, they will not be successful.