How the Minnesota Republican Gubernatorial candidates responded to climate and energy questions
On Wednesday, five Republican candidates running to be the next governor of Minnesota participated in a debate. During the debate, the moderators asked the candidates a question about the role of climate change on the tornado warning that day.
You can see each candidate’s response to the questions below.
Overall, I think the candidates did a pretty good job of answering the question, especially considering how it was phrased. Here’s how I would like to think I’d answer a question like that.
“The blackouts that have harmed Texas and California are a reminder that we need energy that is reliable, affordable, and environmentally friendly, in that order.
Liberal politicians in our state want to mandate that more and more of our electricity come from wind and solar, but these energy sources only work if the sun is shining or the wind is blowing — which is only about 35 percent of the time for wind, and 18 percent for solar in Minnesota.
Would you want to drive a car if the brakes only worked 18 or 35 percent of the time? Of course not. Wind and solar are unserious technologies that are unreliable and expensive.
If we want to reduce carbon dioxide emissions, we need to legalize new nuclear power plants and support large hydroelectric power because they are the only sources of electricity that can be reliable, affordable, and emissions-free.
Minnesota families and businesses need the most affordable energy possible. Governor Walz sanctimoniously claims that climate change is an existential crisis, but his energy proposals refuse to allow new nuclear or hydro to power our economy. His assistance on wind and solar will make our energy more expensive and less reliable, and that’s why it is impossible to take him seriously on this issue.”