The conditions during the 2016 election have been nothing short of bizarre and unusual. During presidential debates, many topics have been brought forth as a concern of the American people. One of the most pressing issues that continuously is brought up is climate change and the questions in regards to how the president will combat it. The two major party candidates contrast each other with their view of climate change as an issue. However, they both have some type of plan in which “clean energy” is involved. The question then becomes: whose policy is more compelling? In order to come up with an answer to this question, one must evaluate each candidate’s plans.

The first plan was put forth by Donald J. Trump. Trump’s vision is to “Make America energy independent, create millions of new jobs, and protect clean air and clean water. We will conserve our natural habitats, reserves and resources. We will unleash an energy revolution that will bring vast new wealth to our country” (DonaldJTrump.com).

He plans to do this by unleashing "America’s $50 trillion in untapped shale, oil, and natural gas reserves plus hundreds of years in clean coal reserves.” However, scientists and environmentalists have stated previously when people have referenced to “clean coal,” that it does not truly exist. Also, shale oil has presented environmental problems. Therefore, his current policy plan is not only hurtful to the environment, it totally ignores the effects that it can have. This disregard for the effects that climate change will have on our country could be attributed to his disbelief that climate change is real.

He said on Twitter in 2012, “The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.” He later on went on to dismiss this claim as a joke. However, there is more evidence that Donald Trump believes that it is a hoax. He said, “I’m not a big believer in man-made climate change. There could be some impact, but I don’t believe it’s a devastating impact" (League of Conservation Voters). Another instance of his denial is when he said, “I think our biggest form of climate change we should worry about is nuclear weapons” (LCV). It is quite clear after reading his statements, that Donald Trump is not worried about the effects of our energy usage on the environment.

However, his Democratic opponent, Hillary R. Clinton, has widely embraced climate change as a major issue and has created a plan to transform America’s energy sector more and more into true clean energy. These goals include being able to “Generate enough renewable energy to power every home in America, with half a billion solar panels installed by the end of Hillary’s first term, cut energy waste in American homes, schools, hospitals and offices by a third and make American manufacturing the cleanest and most efficient in the world, and reduce American oil consumption by a third through cleaner fuels and more efficient cars, boilers, ships, and trucks” (HillaryForAmerica).

One could look at these goals and think that they are extremely out of reach. However, one should not completely disregard a plan based upon the high goals. If the plan is good enough to put forth and somewhat reach the goal, then one should continue forward with that plan and see how far it can truly achieve. Hillary eloquently states, “I won’t let anyone take us backward, deny our economy the benefits of harnessing a clean energy future, or force our children to endure the catastrophe that would result from unchecked climate change” (Hillary For America).

This shows that she is one who does not wish to push this onto our children. She wants to fix and begin to reverse the effects as soon as possible. She wants for the children of future years to have the same opportunities as those who came before them. However, that is not possible if they are suffering from the effects of climate change on our world. Others may wonder what policies as president that Hillary would implement. These include, but do not limit to the following:

• Defend, implement, and extend smart pollution and efficiency standards, including the Clean Power Plan and standards for cars, trucks, and appliances that are already helping clean our air, save families money, and fight climate change.
• Launch a $60 billion Clean Energy Challenge to partner with states, cities, and rural communities to cut carbon pollution and expand clean energy, including for low-income families.
• Invest in clean energy infrastructure, innovation, manufacturing and workforce development to make the U.S. economy more competitive and create good-paying jobs and careers.
• Ensure safe and responsible energy production. As we transition to a clean energy economy, we must ensure that the fossil fuel production taking place today is safe and responsible and that areas too sensitive for energy production are taken off the table.
• Reform leasing and expand clean energy production on public lands and waters tenfold within a decade.
• Cut the billions of wasteful tax subsidies oil and gas companies have enjoyed for too long and invest in clean energy.
• Cut methane emissions across the economy and put in place strong standards for reducing leaks from both new and existing sources.
• Revitalize coal communities by supporting locally driven priorities and make them an engine of U.S. economic growth in the 21st century, as they have been for generations.
• Make environmental justice and climate justice central priorities by setting bold national goals to eliminate lead poisoning within five years, clean up the more than 450,000 toxic brownfield sites across the country, expand solar and energy efficiency solutions in low-income communities, and create an Environmental and Climate Justice Task Force.
• Promote conservation and collaborative stewardship. Hillary will keep public lands public, strengthen protections for our natural and cultural resources, increase access to parks and public lands for all Americans, as well as harness the immense economic potential they offer through expanded renewable energy production, a high quality of life, and a thriving outdoor economy.

(Hillary For America)

With both of their arguments and plans in mind, it is clear that one person is ready to combat the major issues that come with climate change and reverse the effects. The other wishes to continue to deny and push our country further and further into a hole. This hole does not only hurt us as a nation, but also hurts the rest of the world.

There are clear facts that show that climate change will cause major damage to our world, if left unchecked. If one was to base their vote for president on the basis of whose argument is most compelling, one would most likely choice Hillary Clinton. Her policies are well drawn out and easy to understand. Plus, her goals, although they seem unachievable, are a step in the right direction in order to combat this major issue. With Hillary’s plans, the United States would be able to become the world’s superpower nation in clean energy and become an example for the rest of the world to follow in their footsteps to vastly change their energy policies to ones that are green in nature.

This would allow for our world to be sustainable longer and for us to be able to leave the world in good shape for future generations. The policies of Hillary Clinton would not most likely be completed at the end of her presidency. The policies would have to be adopted by future presidents. Which could be problematic if a candidate like Donald Trump would follow after Clinton’s candidacy.

Work Cited

Donald J. Trump Campaign. "Energy." Donald J. Trump. N.p., 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

Hillary For America. "Climate Change." Hillary For America. Hillary For America, 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

League of Conservation Voters. IN THEIR OWN WORDS 2016 PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES ON CLIMATE CHANGE. Rep. League of Conservation Voters, 5 Oct. 2016. Web. 17 Oct. 2016.

Trump, Donald J. Twitter. 6 Nov. 2012. Global Warming. Https://twitter.com/realdonaldtrump/status/265895292191248385?lang=en.