2018年-查塔姆研究所_US_Energy_Policy_after_2012_8页_190kb

US Election Note: Energy Policy after 2012 Summary

Core Content

This document, US Election Note: Energy Policy after 2012, analyzes the potential impact of the 2012 US presidential election on national and international energy policy. It compares the energy strategies of Barack Obama and Mitt Romney, focusing on domestic production, regulation, climate change, and global implications.

Main Points

• Partisan Gridlock: Major congressional action on energy is unlikely after the 2012 elections due to continued political divisions. However, a significant shift in power or a budget deal could change this.
• Domestic Energy Trends: Oil and natural gas production will continue to grow under both candidates, driven by hydraulic fracturing and deepwater drilling. The US has become less reliant on foreign oil, with imports dropping to 42% in 2012.
• Natural Gas Prices: The price of natural gas has dropped significantly, from $8 per tcf in 2008 to $2.25 per tcf in 2012, due to the rise of shale gas. This shift has led to a decline in coal usage and a revival in domestic manufacturing.
• Climate Change and Clean Energy: Climate change has become highly politicized, with lower support among Republicans. Clean energy growth, particularly in wind and solar, is expected to slow in 2013 due to the end of ARRA funding and Republican opposition to tax incentives.

Policy Positions

A Second Obama Term

• Regulatory Focus: Obama would continue to promote clean energy through regulation, including de-carbonizing energy and addressing climate change.
• Oil and Gas Development: He would support increased domestic production, including the Keystone XL pipeline, and streamline drilling regulations.
• Renewable Energy: He would likely extend the Production Tax Credit and Investment Tax Credit for wind and solar, aiming for sustained growth and 20GW of additional wind capacity.
• Climate Action: While a carbon tax is unlikely, he would focus on increasing fuel efficiency standards and potentially revisit a national clean energy standard if the economy recovers.
• Coal and Emissions: The EPA may propose new regulations to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from existing coal plants, accelerating the shift from coal to natural gas and renewables.
• Nuclear Energy: Support for nuclear expansion remains, with new reactors under construction, but market challenges may limit further growth.

A Romney Presidency

• Energy Independence: Romney emphasizes increased domestic production, including offshore and onshore oil and gas, and reducing federal regulations.
• Tax Incentives: He supports eliminating federal tax incentives for oil and gas, including the production tax credit for wind energy, to reduce government interference in the market.
• Coal and Emissions: He would roll back regulations on coal and emissions, potentially allowing existing coal plants to operate without pollution controls and new coal plants to be built.
• Nuclear Energy: He supports streamlining regulations for nuclear reactors but does not advocate for government financing.
• Climate Change: Romney expresses skepticism about anthropogenic climate change, which makes it difficult to justify a carbon tax or strong climate action.
• Research and Development: While basic R&D would continue, funding for mature renewable technologies and commercialization programs is uncertain.

International Implications

• Energy Independence: Both candidates emphasize energy independence, but neither is expected to achieve it within four years. The US will still rely on global oil markets.
• Global Climate Leadership: The US is the second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases after China. Obama's approach is more likely to support international climate efforts, while Romney's may weaken them.
• Technology and Trade: The US has historically led in energy innovation, including solar, nuclear, and hydraulic fracturing. A Romney administration may reduce support for R&D, affecting global technology transfer.
• Trade Practices: Both candidates are likely to challenge unfair trade practices, including subsidies for Chinese renewable energy manufacturers, which could increase global tensions in clean energy trade.

Conclusion

The 2012 election presents a significant choice in shaping the future of US energy policy. While the domestic energy landscape is already shifting, the policies of the next administration will determine the pace and direction of this transformation, with important consequences for both the US and the global community. The election outcome will influence energy supplies, climate action, and international relations.

About the Authors

• Josh Freed: Vice President for the Clean Energy Program at Third Way, a Washington, DC-based think tank.
• Ryan Fitzpatrick: Senior Policy Advisor for Third Way's Clean Energy Program, previously managing energy and environmental policy for US Congressman Heath Shuler.

The US Election Note Series

• This series by Chatham House provides independent analysis of US election impacts on international policy.
• It aims to inform governments, businesses, NGOs, and the public about the potential implications of the election results.
• Supported by the Stavros Niarchos Foundation, the series highlights the importance of US policy in shaping global energy and climate trends.