During the Harris-Trump debate, climate change was addressed, but it was hardly a topic of importance. Their stances on the climate crisis contrasted sharply, reflecting the broader divide on environmental policy. The one big thing they shared: neither candidate had a clear climate plan.
Kamala Harris stressed that climate change is "very real," pointing to the consequences already impacting Americans. She highlighted the rising costs of home insurance and the increasing number of people losing their coverage due to extreme weather events. Harris’s message focused on the economic toll that climate change is taking on everyday Americans, particularly homeowners facing wildfires, storms and floods.
Her emphasis on the real-world impacts of climate change aligned with the strategy of her campaign, which appears to be targeting voters directly affected by these issues. Her running mate, Tim Walz, spoke about rising insurance costs related to wildfires the day before the debate.
Harris also centered the conversation around the Biden administration’s accomplishments, highlighting investments in clean energy. But she failed to outline a detailed plan for the future, beyond just maintaining current policies.
Harris also mentioned the Biden administration's investment of "a trillion dollars in a clean energy economy." Ironically, she soon boasted about how the administration oversaw “the largest increase in domestic oil production in history” - a contradictory move. This focus on both advancements seemed to be an effort to appeal to climate-conscious voters as well as voters in states where natural gas production plays a significant role. Harris underscored that her policies prioritize energy independence and diverse sources of energy, trying to engage various groups.
Despite Harris’s claims of concern over the environment, some environmentalists expressed disappointment in her approach. Groups like the Sunrise Movement criticized her for promoting fracking during the debate, arguing that she should have laid out a more ambitious vision for addressing the climate crisis.
On the other hand, former President Trump largely ignored the question of how he would address climate change. Instead, he used the opportunity to attack the Biden-Harris administration’s record on fossil fuels and manufacturing.
He claimed that a Harris presidency would mean “fossil fuel will be dead,” echoing his statements that Democrats would destroy the U.S. oil industry. Trump’s focus on economic issues related to energy production reflected a larger strategy of aligning with voters concerned about jobs and the economy rather than environmental policy.
Trump’s views on climate change have long been inconsistent. He called it a “hoax” in the past. During the debate, he reiterated his pro- fossil fuel position.
His remarks about renewable energy, particularly solar, were contradictory. While Trump claimed to be a “big fan of solar,” he also expressed disapproval over large-scale solar projects, implying they are inefficient due to the amount of land they require. He framed renewable energy as impractical, downplaying its potential benefits despite the growing scientific consensus on the need for a transition away from fossil fuels.
Climate change remained on the back burner for the majority of the debate, despite its increasing impact on American lives. While Harris at least addressed the reality of extreme weather and its effects on homeowners, neither candidate presented a comprehensive plan for tackling the issue.
However, the consequences of climate change are already being felt across the country. Wildfires, hurricanes, and record heat waves have strained infrastructure and caused significant death. Extreme climate events cost America an estimated $150 billion every year. As such, the next president will face the reality of governing during a time of increasing climate disasters.
Both candidates touched on energy policy, however the debate did little to provide voters with a clear picture of how either would address the challenges posed by climate change in the years ahead. We need to step away from lofty promises and false claims. Instead, there needs to be a clear plan to combat this crisis.
Kamala Harris stressed that climate change is "very real," pointing to the consequences already impacting Americans. She highlighted the rising costs of home insurance and the increasing number of people losing their coverage due to extreme weather events. Harris’s message focused on the economic toll that climate change is taking on everyday Americans, particularly homeowners facing wildfires, storms and floods.
Her emphasis on the real-world impacts of climate change aligned with the strategy of her campaign, which appears to be targeting voters directly affected by these issues. Her running mate, Tim Walz, spoke about rising insurance costs related to wildfires the day before the debate.
Harris also centered the conversation around the Biden administration’s accomplishments, highlighting investments in clean energy. But she failed to outline a detailed plan for the future, beyond just maintaining current policies.
Harris also mentioned the Biden administration's investment of "a trillion dollars in a clean energy economy." Ironically, she soon boasted about how the administration oversaw “the largest increase in domestic oil production in history” - a contradictory move. This focus on both advancements seemed to be an effort to appeal to climate-conscious voters as well as voters in states where natural gas production plays a significant role. Harris underscored that her policies prioritize energy independence and diverse sources of energy, trying to engage various groups.
Despite Harris’s claims of concern over the environment, some environmentalists expressed disappointment in her approach. Groups like the Sunrise Movement criticized her for promoting fracking during the debate, arguing that she should have laid out a more ambitious vision for addressing the climate crisis.
On the other hand, former President Trump largely ignored the question of how he would address climate change. Instead, he used the opportunity to attack the Biden-Harris administration’s record on fossil fuels and manufacturing.
He claimed that a Harris presidency would mean “fossil fuel will be dead,” echoing his statements that Democrats would destroy the U.S. oil industry. Trump’s focus on economic issues related to energy production reflected a larger strategy of aligning with voters concerned about jobs and the economy rather than environmental policy.
Trump’s views on climate change have long been inconsistent. He called it a “hoax” in the past. During the debate, he reiterated his pro- fossil fuel position.
His remarks about renewable energy, particularly solar, were contradictory. While Trump claimed to be a “big fan of solar,” he also expressed disapproval over large-scale solar projects, implying they are inefficient due to the amount of land they require. He framed renewable energy as impractical, downplaying its potential benefits despite the growing scientific consensus on the need for a transition away from fossil fuels.
Climate change remained on the back burner for the majority of the debate, despite its increasing impact on American lives. While Harris at least addressed the reality of extreme weather and its effects on homeowners, neither candidate presented a comprehensive plan for tackling the issue.
However, the consequences of climate change are already being felt across the country. Wildfires, hurricanes, and record heat waves have strained infrastructure and caused significant death. Extreme climate events cost America an estimated $150 billion every year. As such, the next president will face the reality of governing during a time of increasing climate disasters.
Both candidates touched on energy policy, however the debate did little to provide voters with a clear picture of how either would address the challenges posed by climate change in the years ahead. We need to step away from lofty promises and false claims. Instead, there needs to be a clear plan to combat this crisis.
Commentaires