So this year Mr. Obama has endorsed two concepts more modest than cap-and-trade and built to appeal to Democrats and Republicans. The first is establishing a clean-energy standard expected to require that American utilities derive a certain amount of the electricity they provide from clean sources - the president mentioned 80 percent by 2035. Last year, Democrats opposed including nuclear energy or natural gas in that mix; Tuesday night, Mr. Obama included both.Let's try to ignore the assumptions built into that statement that greenhouse gases are bad (they aren't) and "carbon emissions" (meaning CO2) are bad (they aren't), and focus on that "it widens the appeal of the policy to Republicans" ditty.
If America is to have such a standard, this is the right call. It widens the appeal of the policy to Republicans, but it's also sensible, since nuclear energy produces no greenhouse gases and natural gas produces about half the carbon emissions of coal. [emphasis mine]
Does the Washington Post truly believe there is a Republican out there who would support a government mandate that 80% of our electricity must come from (mythical) "clean" sources?
Arlen Specter might have. But he left. For good.
And that short, pudgy senator from South Carolina might. But he's a nitwit. And he'll be gone next time around as well.
There is not a Republican alive today who thinks it a good idea to foist another government obligation onto an already overburdened America. None.
You folks at the Post really need to get out more.