Natural Capital of the Election

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!