Q: Scientists warn that the United States must begin to cut global warming pollution, reducing it at least 20 percent by 2020 and 80 percent by 2050. Do you support mandatory limits on global warming pollution to achieve these targets?
WTW:  I agree with those goals, but making them mandatory is useless without a means of peaceful enforcement.  Providing incentives and leading by example are better ways to approach the problem. Forcing others to comply breeds resentment and conflict.  Educating the public to use climate sensitive products, and reducing trade with climate damaging countries will lead us in the right direction.  Federal, state and local governments can start by converting their fleets to hybrid vehicles.  

 

Q: Renewable energy sources create economic opportunities and reduce pollution. Do you support a federal policy designed to produce at least 20 percent of America's electricity from these clean sources of energy by 2020?
WTW:  Even oil companies support renewable energy now; the handwriting is on the wall.  America can become energy independent in ten years, and exceed 20 percent of our electric supply by 2020.  Not only wind and solar, but hydro, geothermal and biofuels other than corn.  Ethanol made from corn is one of the least efficient biofuels, and its rapid shift from food to fuel production dramatically increased the price of many foods around the world, caused food shortages and increased malnutrition.

We need to continue producing energy however possible though, while moving towards energy independence.  Stop subsidizing oil, but drill wherever safe, using sensitive areas only as a last resort.  President Carter warned us of the energy crisis in 1973, but we ignored his prescient advice to encourage conservation and remove regulatory barriers to alternative energy development.  Using natural gas in more applications can fill the gap while developing renewable sources.  Fuel cell technology running on natural gas can make small communities energy independent.  "Reduce, reuse, and recycle" must become our national motto.

Q: Given that nuclear power is a mature energy technology that already provides about 20% of our nation's electricity, some experts question whether tax dollars should be used to support the construction of new nuclear power plants. Do you support additional subsidies to build new nuclear power plants?
WTW:  More subsidies are not needed.  Nuclear power is competitive with wind, solar, hydro or geothermal and can be financed by state or local bond initiatives if desired.  Utility companies already have near monopolies for providing power and are sufficiently funded by their customers.  Distributed energy is more easily financed.  Small reactors such as those that power nuclear submarines can provide energy for individual cities, reducing environmental impact, transmission loss and cost.

 

Q:  For every 5 dollars the federal government spends on transportation, only 1 dollar goes to public transportation. With record-high gas prices, Americans are looking for more transportation choices.   Do you support changes in federal funding to ensure a more even split between public and private transportation investment?
WTW:  Yes, it is important for the federal government to promote public transportation.  It should restrict its involvement to interstate highways, trains, ships and airports though.  Amtrak is doing a good job, considering it is hobbled by a lack of funding (I ride it regularly).  Most track is now owned by freight lines.  They control traffic and track maintenance, often delaying Amtrak trains.  Compared to the rest of the industrial world our public transportation system is shamefully inadequate.

 

Q:  Some say the best way to save consumers money and reduce our dependence on oil is to make cars and trucks go farther on a gallon of gas. Do you support an increase in fuel efficiency standards to 50 miles per gallon by 2030?
WTW:  The market has already forced auto companies to retool for higher mileage vehicles, so increased fuel efficiency standards are not needed.  Arbitrary benchmarks can create safety risks as manufacturers struggle to meet them.  Eliminating oil subsidies will bring fuel costs in line with their actual value, which will reduce usage and increase demand for fuel-efficient vehicles.  It is quicker and less expensive to save fuel by reducing consumption instead of requiring more efficiency.