With President Biden upending the Presidential race by formally withdrawing and endorsing Vice President Kamala Harris, the future of energy policy could also see some significant changes under a future Harris administration.

In many ways, Harris will be associated with many of the current president’s key initiatives, representing the White House as part of the United Nations climate talks, casting the tie-breaking vote for the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act, and touring the country promoting Biden’s environmental efforts.

However, as a Presidential candidate herself, Harris has endorsed a much more radical climate policy. Harris has said she was “no question…in favor of banning fracking,” even on private property, supported a ban on any new oil and gas infrastructure from being built, and even said she’d be in favor of repealing the filibuster to pass the Green New Deal, of which she was an original co-sponsor.

The energy industry is already warning these policies will not pass muster in key battleground states that are often also oil-and-natural-gas-producing states. The Independent Petroleum Association of America’s (IPAA) Jennifer Pett Marsteller highlighted these statements when talking to Morning Energy:

“These policy stances are out of line with workers in key swing and oil-and-gas producing states like Pennsylvania.”

Similarly, Axios talked to GOP strategist Scott Jennings who “sees jeopardy for Harris in Pennsylvania, a huge swing state — as well as a massive shale gas producer — that could decide the race.”

“If the Dems don’t win PA they are COOKED. And her views aren’t compatible with winning there.” (emphasis added)

Christopher Borick, a political science professor at Pennsylvania’s Muhlenberg College, also highlighted this dilemma with E&E News:

“Harris will be more open to attack on anti-fracking positions. While fracking isn’t a highly salient issue to most Pennsylvania voters, the issue can have an impact on a key slice of the electorate in a state where presidential elections are won on the margins.” (emphasis added)

The Democrat Divide

Indeed, Harris’ record on energy policy exposes the deep divide in the Democratic Party: whether to endorse extreme policies favored by activists but that are out of step with swing voters, or tack to the center and risk the wrath of climate activists.

A stark example of this is the activist community already rallying around Harris in hopes she would prosecute the oil and natural gas industry.

In the past, Harris has boasted about her experience as a prosecutor as key to “hold[ing] Big Oil accountable for its role in the climate crisis.” In fact, Harris wrongly stated that she had “sued Exxon Mobil” as California Attorney General in a Presidential debate despite fact-checkers pointing out that Harris did not.

But Jamie Henn, a climate activist who works for a group called Fossil Free Media, wrote in a blog for Common Dreams that Harris is “perfectly positioned to prosecute the case against Big Oil.”

“From a new perch in the Oval Office, Harris could throw the full weight of the White House behind the prosecution of Big Oil’s climate lies [sic.]. That could include everything from further empowering the Federal Trade Commission to go after the industry’s price gouging to appointing a new attorney general (perhaps one that’s already suing Big Oil) to lead a new lawsuit on behalf of the Department of Justice.” (emphasis added)

Similarly, Collin Rees, political director at Oil Change International, expressed to E&E News that Harris would do even more than Biden on environmental policy.

“We feel confident that she would be strong on climate, perhaps stronger than Biden. I think we’ve seen her be willing to go further on going after big oil and fossil fuels in particular.” (emphasis added)

Other climate activists who were leading the charge to replace Biden on the ticket are also cheering Harris as the potential nominee to ensure climate goals are met.

Divestment and anti-LNG activist Bill McKibben posted on X that Harris “may get the chance to lead us forward on climate and a dozen other challenges,” while the Sierra Club stated it “will marshal its resources and grassroots power to guarantee the Biden-Harris legacy continues.”

Will These Extreme Positions Hurt Democrats in November?

Other activists, however, have not yet definitively weighed in on who should be the eventual nominee. Aru Shiney-Ajay, executive director of the Sunrise Movement, said they “commend” Biden for “taking that step to protect his climate achievements and our democracy.”

Michael Greenberg, founder of Climate Defiance – the group that led a “protest and blockade” of the Democrat National Committee last week – also hailed Biden’s decision, but stopped short of endorsing Harris.

“I am deeply relieved that President Biden passed the torch. This bold decision will help our climate and our democracy fight on for another day.”

So who else could sit atop the ticket? And where would they stand in the Democrat energy divide?

Two top rumored replacements also have energy records that could cause conflict with key energy voters.

From arbitrary price caps to climate superfund bills to its own suit against oil producers, Gov. Gavin Newsom’s anti-energy policies have sent producers fleeing the state.

Similarly, in the auto capital of the world, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer’s administration is openly mulling a suit against oil producers that could include auto manufacturers and utilities, a clear threat to the lifeblood of another consequential state.

Bottom Line: From endorsing a total end to fracking to boasting about prosecuting the oil and natural gas industry, Kamala Harris’ climate policies would put energy workers out of work and out of business. While environmental activists may be cheering, Harris’ record is directly in conflict with key battleground voters that will decide this election.

The post VP Harris has adopted some extreme anti-energy positions over the years. What happens now? appeared first on .

This post appeared first on Energy In Depth.