This week's readings focused on community economic development and then on a global scale about natural capital. There was a lot of talk about resources as a major player in politics as a new greener era emerges.
 |
| Their plans verbatim from their sites |
I thought with election day being tomorrow, I would touch on President Barack Obama and Governor Mitt Romney's energy plans by breaking them up side by side for comparison on their version of energy policy and how they plan to monetize natural capital.
As an environmental scholar I of course have
criticism for both plans, one more so than the other. However obvious that may
be you, my dear reader, are entitled to your own opinion on who will be a more
successful leader. But I am going to be as non-partisan as possible when
discussing this because that is only fair. Let us now consider the bright
(and I say bright because with both of these plans there will be an
excess amount of cosmic radiation that will come through and toast us to our
core, okay that is a bit overdramatic but you get my point) future that we will
have under either administration.
If we continue with the current Obama
administration we are supposedly to be encompassed in an all encapsulating
environmental plan to reduce the drastic current climate change. This to me, is
a very important statement. It is our current president saying "yes we
have a climate problem that needs to be addressed" (not an actual quote).
This is a major step in the right direction. His second bullet mentions moving
towards oil independence by cutting our imports by roughly half which he says
can be done by increasing the fuel economy of cars to on average of 54.4 mpg by
the year 2050. His third bullet combines with his fifth when he states the
importance of having a clean energy economy. He plans to do this through
natural gas, clean coal (which I still hold does not truly exist), wind, and
solar energy by 2035.
If we opt for change and vote in the Romney
administration we can expect "onshore" energy production, which I am
taking to mean clean coal, natural gas, solar, and wind energy. In the second
bullet Romney emphasizes "the most robust five-year offshore lease
plan" which will open resource development... I think that means drilling
for oil since he is quite vague on this point. Point three states opening a
pipeline between Canada, the US, and Mexico to promote "cross border
energy investments." Point four states to reassess all previous energy resource
assessments to determine the current capacity of our natural resources. His
fifth point emphasizes the enactment of stronger environmental regulation to
reduce industries from over emitting while still maintaing a strong economy.
His last point emphasizes the need for innovative technology pertaining to
environmental security done by the private sector to encourage diverse fuels
and natural gas to be eventually used in the transportation sector.
Based on my interpretations I decided to give a +1 or a -1 for each
bullet point for each candidate to see based on my interpretation of how they
turned each environmental point into a SUSTAINABLE natural capital position.
Here is my breakdown:
1. I gave
Obama a +1 for connecting energy economics with climate protection.
2. I gave
Obama a +1 for trying to cut oil usage so significantly.
3. I gave
Obama a -1 for using natural gas because of how destructive it can be to mine
for it and how small a 100 year supply actually is.
4. I gave
Obama a +1 for investing in solar and wind power.
5. I gave
Obama a +1 for increasing the fuel economy of cars to cut down CO2 emissions.
6. I gave
Obama a +1 for investing in clean energy sources (minus the fact of his
inclusion of coal as clean).
7. Bringing
his grand total to a 4
________________________
1. I gave
Romney a +1 for his enthusiasm to create energy in states, even though he left
which type of energy vague.
2. I gave
Romney a -1 for offshore drilling
3. I gave
Romney a -1 for building an oil pipeline that will be pulling oil from the
pristine state of Alaska.
4. I gave
Romney a +1 for reassessing current natural resource stocks
5. I gave
Romney a +1 for increasing regulation and transparency
6. I gave Romney
a +1 for promoting private sector innovation for cleaner technologies
7. Bringing
his grand total to a 2
Obama 4: Romney 2
After crunching the numbers based on how I view and
interpret their points, it is obvious to me, that Obama wins on the
energy/environmental front. Though I am not a supporter of clean coal as Obama
is, I can stomach it more than I can of drilling in Alaska for oil. There
is just this horrible image in my head of brown bears drenched in oil from a
leaked pipeline, or birds dying from a loss of habitat to build a pipeline. It
is my opinion that Obama finds the environment to have more natural capital and
inherent value than does Romney.
Though this is not the only platform either
gentlemen are running on, it is an important part of both of their campaigns.
All I can say is I hoped to bring you the facts on where each man stands, and
on my interpretation of their views on Resource Politics as a student of
sustainability.
And don't forget, no matter which person you vote for, HAVE A
VOICE, MAKE A CHOICE!
