Ever since the announcement that Alaska Governor Sarah Palin would be joining John McCain on the Republican ticket, much of the media focus (or should that be furore?) has concentrated on her personal life and beliefs. In terms of energy policy, the general ‘knee jerk’ view seems to have been that she’s a staunch supporter of the ‘drill, baby drill’ school of thought, with little real analysis beyond that.

However, now that the dust is (sort of) starting to settle, some more sober analysis of the Vice Presidential candidate’s record on renewable energy is starting to emerge.

For starters, as Alaskan Governor, there are signs that she may have paid more than lip service to her supposed support for alternatives to oil. She promised green campaigners that she would put together a comprehensive plan on renewables, and even appointed someone to head up the mission. Beyond this though, there has been little genuine conviction or leadership in support of the sector. In fact, as the summary below reveals, her record on the issue is decidedly shaky:

In 2007, she stalled the Fire Island Wind Farm Project by placing a veto on $20 million of state support.

Even though she later rescinded this decision, enabling the project to move ahead, she has vetoed a further $268 million in budget items this year, including other renewables projects;

This same budget contributed $2 million towards a bizarre conference to “highlight arguments that global warming isn’t threatening the survival of polar bears.” In opposition to the recommendations of state biologists, she has also argued against listing the polar bear as endangered;

Due to lack of financial support, several renewable energy projects in the state have been stalled;

The Alaskan policy of distributing the state’s ‘oil royalties fund’ to residents, instead of ploughing it back into clean energy development, has led some commentators to suggest that any sort of large scale renewables infrastructure is doomed from the start. The Anchorage Daily News pointed out that last year the handouts totalled $700 million, almost half the cost of a massive proposed hydropower project in Lake Chakachamna.

All this would seem to suggest that, under her watch, Alaska is unlikely to adopt the sort of go ahead policies on renewables that we’ve seen in states like Colorado, Pennsylvania and Florida. Will this trend be repeated nationally come next January? We’ll just have to wait and see…

Other Posts on Renewable Energy and Republican Energy Policy:

Image Credit – bobster1985 via flickr on a creative commons license