November 2, 2024
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump may have contrasting visions for America’s energy future, but whether through limited production with a push toward renewables or expanding fossil fuel markets, both paths suggest oil and gas investments will remain strong, impacting what consumers pay at the pump and shaping market dynamics for years to come.
%20copy.png)
When it comes to energy policy in the U.S., Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Donald Trump have very different visions. Both of them want America to be strong, independent, and economically sound, but they have wildly different ideas on how to achieve that—especially when it comes to oil, gas, and the future of energy. So, what would each of them do? Let’s break it down.
Kamala Harris: Harris is all about clean, renewable energy. Think wind, solar, and electric everything. She was one of the champions behind the Inflation Reduction Act, a huge piece of legislation that poured billions into green energy projects. She’s also backed the Green New Deal, aiming for the U.S. to reach net-zero emissions by 2050. But don’t think she’s ignoring oil and gas—she’s just trying to wean us off it while building up our renewable options.
Donald Trump: Trump’s plan? Drill, baby, drill! He wants the U.S. to be “energy dominant,” which for him means ramping up oil, gas, and coal production. Trump’s policies during his presidency rolled back loads of environmental regulations to speed up drilling and mining, saying it would create jobs and keep energy prices low. He’s not too keen on big investments in wind and solar, but he’s all in on oil and gas as a way to keep America independent and energy-secure.
Harris: If we’re making a big push for renewable energy, the price of electricity from clean sources could go down over time. But here’s the catch—until renewables can fully replace oil and gas, there might be some price bumps. Fossil fuel production might slow down, and as we move toward renewables, prices at the pump could be a bit unpredictable.
Trump: Trump’s “drill more” approach is all about keeping energy prices low right now. More drilling means more supply, which he argues will keep gas prices down. But since this approach depends on fossil fuels, it could make us vulnerable to market shocks when something major happens in oil-producing countries.
Harris: Renewable energy gets the love here. Harris’s Inflation Reduction Act gives tax credits and subsidies to companies that invest in clean energy like wind, solar, and electric vehicles. If you’re a business investing in renewables, you could get serious breaks. And there’s more—homeowners can also get credits for things like installing solar panels or buying electric cars.
Trump: Under Trump, fossil fuels get the tax incentives. He cut taxes on oil, gas, and coal companies, making it easier for them to drill and mine. His 2024 plan includes more of the same—keeping taxes low for traditional energy sectors to drive down costs and make fossil fuels more affordable for everyday Americans.
Harris: Harris’s clean energy push means new jobs in green sectors. Think solar panel installers, wind turbine techs, and electric vehicle specialists. But while green jobs grow, traditional fossil fuel jobs might start to fade. Harris’s team says they’ll retrain workers, but it could mean big changes in places that rely on oil and coal jobs.
Trump: Trump’s approach is simple: keep traditional energy jobs alive. By pushing for more drilling and fewer environmental restrictions, he aims to keep oil and gas jobs strong. This means stability for workers in those industries, especially in states where fossil fuels are a big part of the economy.
Harris: With her focus on renewable energy, Harris sees a future where the U.S. isn’t relying on other countries for oil. Renewables are sourced right here, so the more we use them, the less we depend on the global oil market. But in the short term, she’s keeping an eye on balancing fossil fuels with renewables to keep things stable.
Trump: For Trump, energy independence is all about producing as much oil and gas as possible within the U.S. He wants to cut down on imports and make America its own biggest energy supplier. This would mean fewer oil imports, but critics argue it could lock the U.S. into fossil fuels for longer than necessary.
Harris: Harris’s energy plan is a big win for the environment. Fewer fossil fuels mean lower emissions, less pollution, and a cleaner planet overall. But the transition might come with some economic bumps as we figure out how to make renewables a steady energy source.
Trump: Trump’s energy policy prioritizes economic growth over environmental regulations. He argues that reducing restrictions on oil, gas, and coal will help the economy, especially in fossil fuel-heavy states. But environmentalists worry about the long-term impact on climate change and pollution.
Both Harris and Trump want to secure America’s energy future, but they’re taking very different roads to get there:
Kamala Harris and Donald Trump may have contrasting visions for America’s energy future, but whether through limited production with a push toward renewables or expanding fossil fuel markets, both paths suggest oil and gas investments will remain strong, impacting what consumers pay at the pump and shaping market dynamics for years to come.