Climate change becomes top policy issue for U.S. presidential contenders

The Bush administration is hosting a meeting of major economies here in Hawaii to address the issue of climate change, which has also become a top policy issue for major contenders in this year's presidential election.

On its own merit, the process of primaries has narrowed the field of candidates, thus increasing the likelihood that the winner will favor stepped-up efforts to fight global warming and change the way the nation uses energy.

The leading contenders -- Sen. John McCain on the Republican side and Sens. Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama for the Democrats -- support legislation that would gradually cut greenhouse gas emissions, a sharp departure from the Bush administration's approach.

But key differences remain between the parties. And while another Republican -- former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee -- supports emissions cuts, Republican former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney is pushing for more-modest measures.

The Republican candidates see energy security mostly as a supply-side challenge that can be solved by increasing oil and gas drilling, building nuclear power plants, developing so-called clean-coal technologies and helping innovators find technological fixes.

Many worry about the cost and effectiveness of emissions-control efforts. Most favor drilling in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.

Among Republicans, McCain of Arizona, sees the greatest role for government.

Democrats focus more on the demand side. They see a central role for the government to put in place programs to cut oil, natural-gas and electricity use and bolster renewable energy.

Hillary Clinton and Obama both believe the government should set mandatory targets to reduce corporate greenhouse-gas emissions, then allow companies to buy and sell permits to pollute, creating what is known as a cap-and-trade system.

Among Republicans, McCain is the most outspoken on the issue.

In 2003 he broke with many within his party to sponsor greenhouse-gas legislation with Connecticut Sen. Joseph Lieberman, now an independent but at the time a Democrat, although the effort was unsuccessful.

His 2003 proposal -- which would have resulted in free emissions credits to big polluters like utilities -- was less stringent than the system currently supported by Sens. Hillary Clinton and Obama, one that called for auctioning the credits.

McCain warned in a recent speech that "unless we reverse what is happening on this planet, my dear friends, we are going to hand our children a planet that is badly damaged."

Romney has issued few specifics on energy, although he has said he favors opening the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge to oil and gas drilling and accelerating construction of nuclear power plants.

Hillary Clinton and Obama have supported legislation calling for greenhouse-gas emissions to be reduced to 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050.

They want clean-energy funds to quicken the deployment of advanced technologies. They would train people for so-called green-collar jobs and would recruit youths to weatherize homes in poor neighborhoods.

Hillary Clinton's goal is creating five million new clean-energy jobs.

Obama, in a speech in October, said the country needs to make climate change a priority.

"Washington hasn't acted, and that is the reason America hasn't led," he said.

Hillary Clinton has expressed skepticism about efforts to convert coal into a liquid fuel while Obama, from coal-rich Illinois, supports the idea.

Romney expresses support for coal-to-liquids programs because coal is plentiful in the United States.

Although Bush administration officials downplayed the chances of a sharp turn in U.S. climate policy in the next administration, many believe that the possibility is high.

(Xinhua)