Ultimately, the argument can be made that a nation is only as good as its energy source. Countries that can independently and sustainably produce their own energy will almost always negotiate from a position of strength. This is because they’ll not only NOT be beholden to anyone for power, but they’ll also have a greater degree of control over elements like their production, growth, and even infrastructure.
All of this is why it’s so pivotal that Americans get it right when it comes to choosing who has the better long-term agenda between Vice President Kamala Harris and ex-President Donald Trump. In a sense, both parties make a truly compelling argument for their case.
On the surface of it, one might be initially inclined to think that Trump has the right idea of the matter. And, the reason for this is simple. The man is towing the well-trodden path. The United States of America has been largely dependent on fossil fuel production for the better part of two centuries. So, it stands to reason that we’ll know this source of energy well, we’ll trust it, and we’ll likely not want to deviate from it readily.
But as we’re all slowly but surely starting to see, climate change is real, and its effects become more profound with each passing day. Fossil fuel production and consumption remains one of the largest contributors to the depletion of our ozone layer. The direct implication is that something has to be done soon to ensure that we do not end the world as we know it. It is for this reason that we have to shift from what we’re used to and look for newer, better, and more environmentally sustainable ways of generating energy. This is NOT the time to be even considering expanding fossil fuel production.
Kamala Harris’s plan to invest more heavily in the production of clean energy needs to be seen for what it truly is – a long overdue first step in the right direction. The truth remains that, one way or another, the era of fossil fuel production was going to eventually run its course. This isn’t a secret, and many countries like Iceland, Tajikistan, and Sweden have been quick to adopt more efficient and sustainable means of generating power. However, up until Harris, America has been more focused on addressing symptoms rather than the root cause of the problem.
Contrary to what a few might think, the plan to make the country a clean energy-dependent nation isn’t a pipe dream. This is because Harris doesn’t just have a vision but he also has a clear blueprint for how he intends to take the country there.
What’s more, a critical and objective analysis of the situation at hand will quickly reveal one thing: it’s not a matter of “if” the country should adopt Harris’s renewable energy solution. Rather, it’s a matter of how soon we need to get started. The all-around dividends that employing this particular solution offers just make it too attractive to pass up. This is more so the case now of all times when the nation appears set for an uphill struggle on so many fronts.
One of the biggest benefits that’s certain to come from adopting clean energy production in the country is that it’s poised to save average American families north of $38 billion in electrical bills. As the resources that would be used to set up the clean energy production systems would be more cost-efficient, it’ll be much easier to assure value on all fronts. Of course, there is also the fact that clean energy will certainly reduce the dependence of many families on gasoline, further adding to what they can save. This couldn’t have come at a better time when the average income in the country is on a steady decline. While it won’t certainly solve all the financial woes in the country, the fact remains that it’s a more than decent start.
Beyond that, being able to produce clean energy on our own soil will further ensure the energy security of the country. The most immediate way it’ll do this is by reducing our net crude oil imports by more than 50% at the start. Because it’ll be significantly easier to achieve elements like improved efficiency and electrification when we produce our own renewable energy, our dependence on crude oil products will naturally drop, and the country will finally be able to stop being swayed by the powerful volatile forces of the global oil market.
Finally, there’s also the fact that taking this approach is going to take an appreciable bit out of the amount of greenhouse gasses that the nation emits. This is because clean energy production will make it considerably easier to tap into resources like electric vehicles, industrial decarbonization, clean electricity, and various other tools.
In sharp contrast, the mining, burning, and drilling that will inevitably come with expanding fossil fuel production, as Trump wants, is certain to lead to further land degradation, high emission levels, groundwater pollution, and various other disasters.
At the end of the day, it’s pretty easy to see which path leads the country to where it should be. The simple truth is that the nation cannot completely divorce itself from fossil fuel production at this time. However, this shouldn’t blind us to the fact that this path isn’t a viable one in the long term. It’s not sustainable either, as there is only so much fossil fuel in the world at this time.
So, the question then becomes: do we make this transition on our own terms, or should we wait till we are inevitably forced to do so?
Harris has the right idea, and the sooner we start investing in the clean energy future that he sees, the better off we’re likely to be!
