Joe Biden Just Released His Green New Deal. He’s Targeting Net Zero Emissions by 2050.

Staking his claim on the “middle ground.”

Bastiaan Slabbers/NurPhoto/Getty

This story was originally published by HuffPost and is shared here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration. 

Joe Biden promised to reverse the Trump administration‘s deregulatory effort and set the United States on course to hit net-zero emissions by 2050 under a plan the former vice president put forward Tuesday as a version of the Green New Deal initiative animating many of his 2020 rivals’ campaigns.

In a 10,400-word campaign policy proposal, the presumptive front-runner for the next Democratic presidential nomination laid out plans to ramp up renewable energy and electric car investments, spurring 10 million jobs over a decade, and ending fossil fuel subsidies. 

“As president, I will lead America, and the world, not only to confront the crisis in front of us but to seize the opportunity it presents,” Biden said in a campaign video. “I’ll use every authority available to me to drive progress. And I will not accept half measures.”

But the plan, teased ahead of its release as what Reuters called a “middle ground” between big business and the Green New Deal movement, offers scant details and potentially leaves room for fossil fuels. And it operates on a timeline some advocates are likely to reject as too slow to avert catastrophic warming.

The Biden plan revives the Obama-era blend of regulation and multilateral agreements, taking an all-of-the-above approach that opens the door to nuclear power and advocating wide-scale deployment of carbon-capture technology. But it goes much further with the kind of spending rarely attempted in the deficit-obsessed eight years Biden served as vice president.

The plan calls for spending $1.7 trillion over a decade, meant to spur a total of $5 trillion of investment. It includes $400 billion on increased clean energy research and the construction of 500,000 new electric car charging stations by 2030. The proposal requires new buildings to slash emissions 50 percent by 2035. It flexes considerable foreign policy muscle, highlighting levers that a Biden administration could pull at trade and international agencies to pressure other countries to cut emissions.

Biden cites the Green New Deal as a “crucial framework” and nods throughout the proposal to the potential for emissions cuts to bring jobs. But the former vice president’s plan stops short of calling for the sort of full energy transformations on which his rivals are running.

Jay Inslee, the Washington governor running exclusively on climate action, proposed a detailed $9 trillion plan to decarbonize most big sectors of the country by 2030 and listed the anti-labor law he’d repeal as a boon to workers. Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.) is assembling a suite of wonky approaches to cutting emissions, including requiring the Pentagon to zero out emissions in the operations of the US military, one of the world’s top polluters, over a decade. Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is declaring war on the fossil fuel industry, throwing his weight behind the Green New Deal.

Biden sets a more flexible target for the middle of the century, giving his administration until 2025 to come up with a system to enforce emissions reductions. The 2050 target could be too late to keep warming within the range of 1.5 degrees Celsius, or 2.7 degrees Fahrenheit, above pre-industrial levels. The United Nation warned last October that to keep temperatures from reaching 1.5 degrees—for context, the world has already warmed 1.1 degrees Celsius—the world would need to cut emissions nearly in half by 2030. Developing countries like China, Indonesia and Vietnam, whose emissions are surging, are unlikely to undertake such radical cuts unless the world’s biggest historic emitter leads the way.

The Biden plan sets net zero targets—meaning emissions don’t necessarily need to be eliminated, only contained and balanced. The proposal also calls for investment in carbon capture, use and storage, an industry largely funded by oil and gas companies. Carbon dioxide captured from fossil fuel-burning plants is typically only profitable to sequester if it’s used to drill oil, a fact often used by activists to discredit its value as a climate solution.

Biden explicitly acknowledges dangerous continued reliance on fossil fuel use yet offered no specific interventions to radically redirect those outcomes in this plan.

“Notwithstanding the progress we have made in reducing emissions in the power sector, fossil fuels still comprise nearly 80 percent of global energy use,” the proposal states. “There is much more work to be done to identify affordable solutions.”

The former vice president, who is topping most polls, took heat last month after his campaign teased details of his climate plan, promising a “middle ground” approach. Biden became a bogeyman at rallies organized by Sunrise Movement, the youth-led group propelling Green New Deal protests. Greenpeace nearly flunked Biden last week on its ranking of candidates’ climate credentials.

The early reviews of Biden’s climate plan showed a willingness to acknowledge the former vice president’s progress on the issue.

Sunrise Movement called it “a good start” but said, “we need even more ambition from candidates if we’re serious about saving millions of people from death before entire nations sink into the sea.” Greenpeace said the plan marked “a critical step forward” but “does not do nearly enough.” Friends of the Earth called it a “half measure to stop climate change.” 

More Mother Jones reporting on Climate Desk

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate