The longer this marathon presidential campaign goes on, the more I've liked Edwards. So, when I got my Daily Grist email this morning, I was surprised to see this story: Edwards not as green as you thought.
Dem presidential candidate Chris Dodd has called for such a policy in blunt language: "The Dodd Plan requires all new plants to capture and sequester CO2. No exceptions."
Most enviros seem to think that John Edwards has also called for such a moratorium, and have lauded him for it.
Only he hasn't.
Edwards would require that all new coal plants be compatible with sequestration -- that they be IGCC plants, which make CO2 easier to separate and bury -- but he would not require them to actually sequester their emissions.
I like Chris Dodd, too, but I worry that he's another unelectable east coast liberal (maybe I've just been brainwashed by the right wing smear machine, but if I have, imagine the impact on independent, gun-toting swing voters in Arkansas or New Mexico). So, this is a huge problem.
I really want to get behind Edwards. My wife says he wins the "dimples primary," which we should never underestimate. But we are avid environmentalists, and carbon sequestration is a huge issue. I'm hoping you Edwards fanatics can either show my why this article is wrong, or get to the Edwards campaign and make sure they get on the right side and out in front of this like they have on other issues.