Trump vs. Clinton: Who's Better on the Environment?

Editor's Note: In anticipation of the presidential debates, Motherboard has graded Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump on the depth of their insight, and the viability of their policies, regarding the subjects near and dear to us: cybersecurity, health, energy, space, environment, telecom and, of course, marijuana. Spoiler: It's not always pretty.

When it comes to Earth's climate and environment, the beliefs and policy measures promoted by Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump have been either polarizing or brushed under the rug. On one end of the spectrum, Clinton has vowed to stimulate renewable energy initiatives, supports the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and has long been a voice against wildlife trafficking. On the other end, Trump denounces the existence of climate change, has made few statements on issues such as conservation, and remains deeply in the pocket of the oil and gas industry.

Based on speeches alone, Clinton is the candidate most aligned with environmentalists, conservationists, and climate scientists. For starters, she accepts that anthropogenic climate change is happening, and has promised to continue President Obama's legislative efforts to curb carbon emissions, protect wildlife and their habitat, and kickstart clean energy such as wind and solar power. In a statement on the Paris Agreement, she promised to transform America's economy into one that runs on renewables. Furthermore, she has vowed to build out a federal Environmental and Climate Justice Taskforce, which would focus on fighting the direct human impacts of climate change and environmental destruction. The taskforce would be charged with "finding and fixing the next 50 Flints—the low-income urban and rural communities facing the most acute environmental risks."

Trump, meanwhile, has tried to align himself with fossil fuel titans who would ostensibly use their influence to tear down President Obama's pro-climate legislation.

If elected, Trump would attempt to abolish the EPA, and with it, many clean air and water regulations that help to keep our lands and communities safe from pollution. According to Trump, he would also "cancel" the United States' involvement with the Paris Agreement, a global pact to collectively lower carbon emissions and the average temperature, over his concern that subsequent policy measures would not be in our country's best interest, even though climate change is a significant threat to national security.

Still, as with most issues debated on the campaign trail, our candidates' stances aren't as simple as they might seem. Clinton, despite her promises to make the United States a leader in the clean energy revolution, has made some questionable policy choices throughout her career. For example, as a junior senator, she voted to expand offshore drilling in the Gulf of Mexico. Clinton also possess ties to the fossil fuel industry, through the form of donations and private fundraising events. And perhaps the biggest concern to environmentalists, she hasn't totally disavowed fracking for natural gas, which many of its opponents view as an irresponsible way to wean our nation off fossil fuels.

So, in this election, when it comes to climate and the environment, we're grading each candidate based not on who is best for these issues, but who has the most knowledge on the issue and won't totally feed us to the endangered wolves. There isn't an obvious winner, but there is a loser, and he's the one who once called this whole climate change thing a "Chinese hoax."