Explore Candidates → President → Ralph Nader on Environment and Energy
Ralph Nader
on
Environment and Energy
- Abortion and Birth Control
- Civil Liberties and Domestic Security
- Crime and Punishment
- Education
- Environment and Energy
- Gay Rights
- Government and Elections
- Gun Control
- Health Care
- Immigration
- Internet and Media
- Iraq and Foreign Policy
- Medical Marijuana and Drug Policy
- Religion and Public Life
- Science
- Social Security
- Taxes and Budget
- Trade and Economics
Ralph Nader believes "it is time to break our addiction to fossil fuels. The evidence of global warming is mounting. We threaten the global environment with our continued use of fossil fuels. Not only is this an ecological threat, it is a tremendous economic threat, facing all of humanity. Global warming will bankrupt the re-insurance industry, spread infectious tropical diseases, and increase severe and unpredictable weather.
“Kyoto!” Nader said derisively. “It was watered down so badly, structured to alienate the third world, then Gore went back home and there was no push to make the case“ for the Senate to ratify the treaty. There was unanimous opposition in the Senate. But Nader said that should not have stopped Gore. ”It’s what do they stand for versus what do they fight for - I discount the rest as linguistic differences.“ He concluded, ”Anyway, my phrase is that there are few major differences.“
New York Times Nov 1, 2000, by Melinda Henneberger,
"Our response to global warming must include the following: Increased use of renewable energy and diminished use of fossil fuels, especially for electric power generation; improved fuel efficiency of all vehicles; improved efficiency of all appliances and industrial equipment; the elimination of all subsidies for fossil fuel and nuclear development and production. We need to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and [achieve] the 7% reductions promised by the US by 2008."
Ralph Nader’s letter to the Sierra Club Jul 24, 2000
"The best bang for the buck is energy efficiency. It's renovating, lightbulbs, heating, air-conditioning, renovating buildings. That's the best way, and that's less fuel, less greenhouse gases. The second is solar energy. Solar energy is the most universal solvent, and that's the way to deal with it."
watch now
Ralph Nader supports "a new clean energy policy that no longer subsidizes entrenched oil, nuclear, electric, and coal mining interests--an energy policy that is efficient, sustainable, and environmentally friendly. We need to invest in a diversified energy policy--including renewable energy like wind and other forms of solar power, more efficient automobiles, homes and businesses--that breaks our addiction to oil, coal, and atomic power.
"We should be energy independent in this country. Solar energy is getting more efficient, more practical, a lot of small businesses going into it, there’s no reason for us to get into foreign involvements because of the abuse of power of global corporations."
Interview on “Larry King Live” Oct 6, 1996
"Who's making about solar conversion as a national mission in our country? Gore is talking about it. They [the democratic presidential candidates] are tiptoeing here and there and they are avoiding some very serious issues.
"Opposes oil exploration in Arctic refuge"
Q: Do you support drilling in Alaska? A: "The way to deal with energy was for Clinton/Gore to establish strong energy efficiency standards, which they did not do, especially for the motor vehicle industry, which is now going down to 24 1/2 mpg, and also for lighting and heating. The energy you don’t waste is the energy you don’t have to drill in a beautiful preserve up there in northern Alaska, which is just a temporary fix anyway for our inebriated energy gouging and pricing system."
Nader-Buchanan debate on ‘Meet the Press’ Oct 1, 2000
From Nader's official campaign website: "Nader/Gonzalez proposes a straightforward carbon tax - set to annual benchmarks to bring, with the expansion of solar energy, US emissions to at least 80 percent below 1990 levels by 2050. A phased in initial price of $50 per ton of carbon dioxide equivalent emissions would harness $300 billion annually - money that would be put back in the pockets of American taxpayers, and money that would finance a green industrial revolution, providing a boon of 10 million new green collar jobs (in efficiency retrofits, cogeneration, geothermal, solar energy generation, and green grid enhancements) in the first five years. The carbon tax will be most efficiently levied at carbon bottlenecks, the key points where flows of carbon are the most concentrated - trunk pipelines for gas, refineries for oil, railroad heads for coal, LNG terminals, cement, steel, aluminum, and GHG-intensive chemical plants."
"[Nuclear power]…produces radioactive waste, it is vulnerable to sabotage and a national security problem, and so costly Wall Street will not fund a nuclear plant construction without a U.S. government guarantee."
"We urge a new clean energy policy that no longer subsidizes entrenched oil, nuclear, electric and coal mining interests -- an energy policy that is efficient, sustainable and environmentally friendly. We need to invest in a diversified energy policy including renewable energy like wind and other forms of solar power, more efficient automobiles, homes and businesses -- one that breaks our addiction to oil, coal and atomic power. A new clean energy paradigm means more jobs, more efficiency, greater security, environmental protection and increased health."
Ralph Nader supports "a new clean energy policy that no longer subsidizes entrenched oil, nuclear, electric, and coal mining interests--an energy policy that is efficient, sustainable, and environmentally friendly."
No to nuclear power, solar energy first.
Campaign Website, Feb. 25, 2008
"Fuel efficiency standards are stuck because the auto industry is obstinate and our elected officials are docile. For years, the U.S. auto industry, and the government, have produced 'promising prototype' cars that have gone nowhere. Toyota and Honda are starting to make inroads with their gas/electric hybrid cars. The CAFE standard should be raised to at least 45 mpg for cars and 35 mpg for light trucks, to be phased in over five years. The auto industry has had almost 20 years to gear up for this schedule, given their bragging about their research and development programs."
Nader indicated support for "h) Strengthen emission controls and fuel efficiency standards on all gasoline and diesel-powered engines, including cars, trucks, and sport utility vehicles."
"We need to invest in a diversified energy policy--including renewable energy like wind and other forms of solar power, more efficient automobiles, homes and businesses--that breaks our addiction to oil, coal, and atomic power."
"Our response to global warming must include the following: Increased use of renewable energy and diminished use of fossil fuels, especially for electric power generation; improved fuel efficiency of all vehicles; improved efficiency of all appliances and industrial equipment; the elimination of all subsidies for fossil fuel and nuclear development and production. We need to ratify the Kyoto Protocol and [achieve] the 7% reductions promised by the US by 2008... [Also] I would veto any legislation that makes it impossible to consider increasing fuel efficiency. I would close the loophole that allows sport utility vehicles to avoid the same CAFE standards as cars. And I support raising the CAFE standard to at least 45 miles per gallon for cars and 35 miles per gallon for light trucks, to be phased in over five years. We need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 50% to 70% immediately just to keep global warming from getting any worse."
Ralph Nader’s letter to the Sierra Club Jul 24, 2000
Nader did not indicate support for the following: [Did NOT indicate support] e) Relax logging restrictions on federal lands. [Did NOT indicate support] f) Relax standards on federal lands to allow increased recreational usage. [Did NOT indicate support] i) Support opening a portion of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for oil exploration.
"What about measures of environmental devastation? These don't appear on the balance sheets of Exxon, DuPont, General Motors, or Peabody Coal. Degrading the air, water and soil that we use does not register with any reports of such companies. Global warming, ozone depletion, oceanic deterioration and forest clear-cutting do not have company logos on them."
In his career as consumer advocate Nader has been instrumental in the Resource Consumption Alliance which conserves trees.
Green Party 2008 Presidential Candidate Questionnaire Feb 3, 2008
"Legislative efforts to repeal or reform the mining giveaway regularly fail, blocked by senators from western states. These senators are not standing up for their states’ best economic interests; the giveaway mines create few jobs and massive environmental problems with high economic costs in foregone tourist and recreational revenues and uses. The senators are standing up for the mine companies, which pour millions in campaign contributions into the Congress. From 1987 to 1994, the mining companies gave $17 million to congressional candidates; and extracted $26 billion worth of minerals."
Cutting Corporate Welfare, p. 18-19 Oct 9, 2000
"I advocate the immediate cessation of commercial logging on US public lands and the protection from road-building of all 60 million acres of large forest tracts remaining in the National Forest system. National Forests produce less than 5% of total volume of timber consumed in the US. I would veto all bills that might include provisions to dismantle any aspect of this National Forest protection policy. I consider it crucial to pursue public and legislative support for such a plan to endure."
Ralph Nader’s letter to the Sierra Club Jul 24, 2000
"As a society we have failed to respect the foresight of Theodore Roosevelt, John Muir and other conservationist founders of the national park system, neglecting to invest sufficient resources to maintain, let alone properly expand, the parks. A National Park Service-estimated funding gap of nearly $9 billion has left animal populations at risk, park amenities in substandard or unusable conditions and many national historical artifacts in danger of being lost to posterity."
"Perspectives on Federal Spending” Jul 27, 1999
Emailed response from the Nader campaign's communications director on Oct. 18, 2008: "Ralph Nader strongly supports initiatives to conserve and recover endangered species."
Nader, according to his campaign literature, "supports breaching dams to restore habitat and flood control as well as protect endangered species."
"The federal highway bills are another major source of pork. Last year’s Transportation Equity Act, will allocate billions of dollars to new road construction, much of it unnecessary and harmful. Instead of supporting modern mass transportation, Congress continues to surrender to the demands of road construction interests and the highway lobby. The harmful consequences include sprawl, air pollution, and contributions to global warming."
Cutting Corporate Welfare, p.110 Oct 9, 2000
"The United States needs a redirected federal budget that adequately funds the crucial priorities like infrastructure, transit and other public works, schools, clinics, libraries, forests, parks, sustainable energy and pollution controls. The budget should move away from the deeply documented and criticized (by the US General Accounting Office, retired Admirals and Generals and others) wasteful, redundant "military industrial complex" as President Eisenhower called it, as well as corporate welfare and tax cuts for the wealthy that expand the divide between the luxuries of the rich and the necessities of the poor and middle class."
"We've had ten years of economic growth and that growth is not diminishing the problems of health care, retirement, child poverty, lack of public transit, consumer exploitation."
"In the year 2000 Americans took 9.4 billion trips on public transportation, an increase of 3.5% from 1999. But in 1946 Americans recorded 23.4 billion trips which is still unsurpassed even though the population was only half of what it is today. What happened to account for the decline of public transit, which is safer, more efficient, less polluting, and reduces highway congestion, while stimulating nearby economic development? The major answer to this question is the long-standing opposition of The Highway Lobby -- the auto, oil, tire and cement industries. You don't hear much these days about "The Highway Lobby" as such. The reason is that it has done its destructive job which is to make America an occasion for ribbons of crowded highways carrying millions of motor vehicles as the only "practical and direct" way to get around on the ground."