Politics is no longer a civil discourse about two ways to take positive actions that will benefit our country. One of the areas that is up for debate is energy. Even though the changing climate is one of the most imminent dangers facing our country, it’s hardly gotten any coverage. Compared to the gun control, women’s rights, equality, immigration and health care topics, energy has taken a backseat. While those are important issues, none of them will matter if our world collapses.

The Parties are Divided over Climate Change

Republican: Trump flat-out rejects climate change as a legitimate issue. He disagrees with 97 percent of the world’s scientists and feels that attacks on U.S. soil hold precedence over the perceived effects of climate change.

Both Rubio and Marco feel that climate change is a real issue, but question how much humans have affected it. By that same logic, they also question what we can do to stop it. If we aren’t causing it, then there’s really no reason to try and do anything differently.

Kasich, on the other hand, agrees that climate change is real and that humans have played a direct role in it. He is the only Republican candidate that goes far enough to actually agree with scientists, but has so far been reluctant to say what he would do about it as president.

Democrat: Both Sanders and Clinton have proposed fairly strong plans for the reduction of classic, nonrenewable energy and the promotion of other sustainable options. Both candidates support a strong stance in favor of sustainable energy.

The U.N. Agreement Could Be at Risk

When Obama attended the United Nation’s Paris Climate Change Conference in 2015, he pledged a 32 percent reduction in carbon emissions by 2030.

Republican: Republicans have already been stoically against this commitment, especially since many Republicans are from areas that are deeply reliant on fossil fuels for jobs. Fossil fuels account for about two-thirds of our energy generation, so it makes sense that there’s a lot of jobs that are reliant on it. Meanwhile, renewable energy, not including nuclear, only makes up about 13 percent.

So far, all of the Republican candidates have agreed not to honor the Obama Administration pledge. They all say that the deal is either illegal or unnecessary, and that the only sure thing that will happen is job loss.

Democrat: Again, both Sanders and Clinton support Obama’s pledge. Sander’s overall energy plan is more ambitious than Clinton’s, where he wants the United States to have homes, heating and transportation run entirely on renewable resources. Clinton’s plan is to have all American homes powered by clean energy within 10 years of her election. While that would require a great deal of progress, it does not take into account the transportation issue that Sander’s does.

The Nation’s Green Progress Could Stall

Republican: Since Republicans are so set on saving jobs and boosting the economy in areas that are still heavily dependent on fossil fuels, the nation faces a serious problem. The majority of Americans think that we should do whatever it takes to save the environment, even if it costs jobs, but that sounds different when it directly impacts your job in particular. While all the candidates on this side say they would support green technologies, they provide basically no support to the industry.

Trump, on the other hand, has been blatantly against green technology. He has asked other countries not to put up wind turbines, and has presented no plan to promote sustainable energy.

Democrat: Clinton has a progressive plan. She wants to install millions of solar panels, remove oil and gas subsidies, promote wind power and create jobs in the process.

Sanders, however, actually goes above Clinton’s plan. He wants the nation to be on 100 percent sustainable energy. He wants to stop new oil and gas production, which would force our economy to move toward green energy.

Renewable Energy Companies Could Face New Hurdles

Republican: Cruz isn’t presenting too many hurdles to new technology. In fact, he’s actually calling for a cease fire of all government subsidies for energy, including those for gas and oil. This is actually good news from the Republican side, but he’s also against sustainable energy tax credits and setting a national goal to reduce carbon emissions.

Kasich, on the other hand, supports wind and solar subsidies. However, he also thinks we need to look into all energy methods, including upping production of oil, gas and coal, despite their environmental effects.

While Rubio appears to support green technologies, most of his programs are heavily in favor of old methods.

Democrat: Sanders is very interested in the idea of using solar. He has stated several times that he strongly feels renewable energies, like solar, should be subsidized by the government. Part of this is because of his focus on the environment. The other aspect is because he does want to use solar to help promote business growth.

Clinton is also in favor of sustainable energy, but instead of offering to subsidize the new market, she instead pledges to end subsidies for oil and gas. This is a very different idea than Sanders, and while it would help to even out the playing field, it would still prevent government from taking a firm stance in support for the fledgling industry.

All in all, only one side is taking the energy crisis seriously. Let’s hope all the parties can get on board before it’s too late.