WASHINGTON — The recent scorching summer has brought climate issues to the forefront of the political landscape, highlighting contrasting energy and environmental strategies from Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump. Both figures have yet to detail their specific plans for addressing climate change alongside maintaining a stable energy supply.
In her address to the Democratic National Convention, Harris emphasized the significance of climate change, framing it as one of the “fundamental freedoms” essential to the election, which include access to clean air and water, free from hazardous pollution.
As a key player in the Biden administration, Harris cast the deciding vote on the Inflation Reduction Act, a significant climate initiative that garnered exclusively Democratic support. During her tenure as California’s senator, she championed the Green New Deal, an ambitious agenda aimed at transitioning the U.S. to sustainable energy sources at a rapid pace, a cause strongly backed by the Democratic Party’s progressive faction.
Conversely, Trump has openly criticized Biden’s green policies, terming them a “green new scam” during his time at the Republican National Convention. His approach advocates for an increase in fossil fuel production—oil, natural gas, and coal—while seeking to reverse significant components of the 2022 climate legislation.
“We have more liquid gold under our feet than any other country by far,” Trump stated, emphasizing America’s potential to profit immensely from its energy resources.
Environmental advocates, who largely support Harris, label her as a “proven climate champion,” indicating she is poised to confront the oil industry while building upon Biden’s climate initiatives, including policies promoting electric vehicles and curbing emissions from coal power plants.
Senator John Barrasso of Wyoming contends that the current administration’s regulations have imposed heavy burdens on American energy, costing taxpayers substantially for electric vehicle incentives and other green initiatives.
Polls show that Democrats have a clear advantage on climate issues, with over half of American adults expressing trust in Harris regarding her approach to climate change, while a significant portion exhibit little faith in Trump’s climate policies.
Reflecting on their respective positions, Harris has pivoted on offshore drilling and fracking debates, stating that she would not ban fracking, which is vital for the economy in swing states like Pennsylvania.
“As vice president, I did not ban fracking. As president, I will not ban fracking. We can create a thriving clean energy economy without that ban,” Harris affirmed in a recent interview.
While Trump maintains a mission to ensure America has the cheapest energy globally, he endorses increased drilling on public lands and expedited approvals for natural gas pipelines.
Addressing regulations on vehicle emissions, Trump has labeled tough mandates as detrimental to the auto industry, although he has shifted towards a more favorable stance on electric vehicles following endorsements from key industry figures.
Harris has proactively supported initiatives for electric vehicle adoption, celebrating funding for cleaner school buses aimed at fostering healthier futures for children.
Under the Biden-Harris leadership, over 250,000 energy jobs were created last year, prominently within the clean energy sector, as noted by the Energy Department.
Trump’s approach critiques climate investments as burdensome and counterproductive, pledging a swift reversal of existing policies upon returning to office.
As the climate discussion unfolds, the contrasting visions of Harris and Trump become increasingly pivotal in shaping America’s energy future and approach to climate change.
The Biden administration aims to balance energy exports with environmental considerations, pausing new liquefied natural gas terminal approvals to assess their climate impact, while Trump vows immediate greenlighting of such projects on his potential return to power.
As the political landscape evolves, the candidates’ differing strategies will be critical in determining the trajectory of the nation’s energy policy and climate response.
