ARCTIC DRILLING

Experts believe there’s as much as 90 billion barrels of oil under the Arctic Ocean that could be turned into consumer energy, but environmentalists say the risks of an environmentally disastrous spill are too great and that tapping the Arctic reserves only encourages the world’s addiction to fossil fuels.

Sanders: AGAINST
“We cannot address climate change and drill in the Arctic.” (7/31/15)

Clinton: AGAINST
“The Arctic is a unique treasure. Given what we know, it’s not worth the risk of drilling.” (8/18/15)

CARBON TAX

Politicians who want to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions are divided between those who favor a so-called carbon tax—an outright fee assessed on manufacturing methods that produce carbon emissions—and a cap-and-trade method, which would set a national maximum for carbon emissions and allow companies to trade carbon-emission permits as long as the general limit is maintained. Carbon-tax proponents say their method would create an incentive for corporations to reduce pollution, as well as spur growth in green energy. Cap-and-trade supporters say their way would blunt the impact on economic growth and that it would be more flexible, practical, and market-driven.

Sanders: FOR
According to the candidate’s website, Sanders says he will institute a carbon tax, ban fossil-fuel lobbyists from working in the White House, and reduce carbon emissions by 40 percent by 2030 (compared to 1990 levels).

Clinton: NOT STATED
Clinton has been mum about her position on placing a tax on sources of greenhouse-gas pollution, but she cosponsored a cap-and-trade bill in 2007 and made cap-and-trade part of her 2008 presidential bid. She promises to install 500 million solar panels by the end of her first term and cut greenhouse-gas emissions by up to 30 percent by 2025 (relative to 2005 levels).

FRACKING

Hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, is a method of accessing oil or natural gas that’s deep under rock, but there are concerns that the process is also contaminating water, causing air and ground pollution, and even possibly leading to earthquakes. Proponents of the practice, however, argue that the economic benefits outweigh the potential ecological harm.

Sanders: AGAINST
Sanders says he would ban fracking on both public and private land.”I’m very proud that the state of Vermont banned fracking. I hope communities all over California and all over America do the same.” (10/17/14)

Clinton: NOT STATED
As secretary of state, Clinton encouraged developing countries to develop fracking, in hopes of creating opportunities for U.S. companies. As a presidential candidate, she promises to strengthen pipeline safety and reduce methane lakes by the end of her first term. But she hasn’t taken an official stance on hydraulic fracturing.

ETHANOL PRODUCTION

Biofuels are considered by supporters to be a way to reduce America’s dependence on foreign oil and to help cut down on so-called tailpipe emissions. Opponents say that manufacturing ethanol actually requires burning more gasoline than it would save, that using ethanol releases other harmful chemicals like formaldehyde into the air, and that adding biofuels to gasoline reduces fuel efficiency, requiring drivers to guzzle more to go the same distance. They also argue that biofuels would drive up the price of crops used for human consumption as opposed to those used for energy.

Sanders: AGAINST
On June 20, 2007, the U.S. Senate considered H.R. 6, the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007, which would have favored the livestock industry at the expense of ethanol producers. Sanders voted in favor for the act.

Clinton: FOR
Benefiting ethanol producers, Clinton voted against the act, which ultimately failed by a 31-63 vote.


KEYSTONE XL PIPELINE

The fourth phase of the $7 billon Keystone XL Pipeline would have delivered crude oil from Canada through Montana, South Dakota, and Nebraska, where it would have joined up with the existing phase-one Keystone pipeline. That path would have taken it through the ecologically sensitive Sandhills wetlands and the Ogallala aquifer. Critics said the danger of potential spills was too great and pointed out that the transferred oil was derived from tar sands, necessitating the creation of notably more greenhouse gases than other sources. Supporters said the pipeline would have created thousands of jobs, and that without the pipeline, the oil would simply be transported by carbon-intensive tanker ships instead. After seven years of debate and controversy, President Barack Obama vetoed the fourth phase of the Keystone Pipeline on November 6, 2015.

Sanders: AGAINST
“It is totally crazy for the Congress to support the production and transportation of some of the dirtiest oil on the planet.” (1/29/15)

Clinton: FOR, THEN AGAINST
“We haven’t finished all of the analysis. ... But we are inclined to do so, and we are for several reasons—going back to one of your original questions—we’re either going to be dependent on dirty oil from the Gulf or dirty oil from Canada.” (10/15/10)

“I think it is imperative that we look at the Keystone pipeline as what I believe it is —a distraction from important work we have to do on climate change. And unfortunately, from my perspective, one that interferes with our ability to move forward with all the other issues. Therefore I oppose it.” (9/22/15)