Donald Trump has attempted to impose a new global order on climate and energy by declaring the US has “the largest amount of oil and gas of any country on Earth, and we are going to use it”.
He has – baselessly – said pulling out of the nonbinding Paris climate agreement would save the US “over a trillion” dollars.
As with much of Trump 2.0 blunderbuss policy actions, these can be founded on dodgy economics and mistruths. Yet these actions will be hugely disruptive – and take a toll on the planet when it has never been so vulnerable.
Emerging from the haze of rapid-fire executive orders last week, it is clear he might not effect upheaval in the ways he envisages on this front.
Pulling out of Paris (again) was bad theatre sealed with a Sharpie then thrown to his approving supporters. This time, it will be done in a year, compared to four previously, which extends the period for undermining global efforts from outside the UN room.
Tjada D’Oyen McKenna of aid organisation Mercy Corps says: “Withdrawal from the Paris Agreement weakens US commitments both to reduce the emissions driving the climate crisis and to provide climate finance to support the world’s most climate-vulnerable communities as they face increasingly frequent and severe weather-related disasters.”
By pulling out of the agreement, the US joins an inglorious group of Yemen, Iran and Libya.
It comes after 2024 was the hottest year on record and it is a huge step backward by the second biggest carbon-emitting country when the world needs greater ambition and clear leadership to address the climate crisis – not retreat.
For the most vulnerable and least to blame “climate change is no longer a distant threat”, McKenna says. It is daily reality with devastating impacts for hundreds of millions of people.
Trump will find a way to categorise this immense and increasingly costly crisis as it resurfaces repeatedly with extreme weather events on his doorstep – without referencing the problem of global warming antagonised by fossil-fuel emissions.
There is a grave risk the US exit may embolden others to do likewise, thereby weakening the UN’s climate Cop process – the agent of Paris pact implementation.
[ Eamon Ryan: EU must ensure renewed backing for Paris pact as Cop29 faces into difficult negotiations ]
Yet there is a strong possibility it will galvanise powerful blocs such as the EU and China – odds on to become the global leader in clean tech despite being the world’s worst carbon polluter.
On a path to decarbonisation, both see the benefits and are set to increase ambition during a critical year culminating in Cop30 in Brazil. Helping this is the understanding of the threat and need to respond more urgently across the globe.
The most consequential outcome of “drill, baby, drill!” will be emissions and temperature rises. Analysis by Carbon Brief shows Trump’s return could generate an additional four billion tonnes of US emissions by 2030 compared with Biden commitments.
The extra four gigatonnes of carbon-dioxide-equivalent would negate – twice over – all of the savings from deploying wind, solar and other clean technologies around the world over the past five years. That is more than the combined yearly total from the 140 lowest-emitting countries.
This analysis might understate Trump’s impact as new fossil-fuel extraction is not included and would likely raise global emissions further and end hopes of keeping global average warming below 1.5 degrees.
US emissions have been falling since 2005, due to a combination of economic shifts, greater efficiency, growth of renewables and a shift from coal to gas power.
While Trump often succumbs to haphazard actions, his hollowing out of Biden’s landmark Inflation Reduction Act, which put the US on course to transition to a clean-energy economy, clinically put oil and gas back in the driving seat.
The “Unleashing Energy Dominance” order includes moves to resume liquefied natural gas exports; changes to vehicle standards favouring diesel/petrol cars over electric vehicles (EVs) and knocks out multibillion investment in hydrogen hubs. His de-incentivising of wind power is predicted to have limited impact onshore – a resource flourishing in red states with bipartisan support – but completely stifles offshore development.
American Clean Power Association chief executive Jason Grumet has said: “Wind power is an essential element of our ability to serve soaring electricity demand for manufacturing and data centres that are key to national security. It is also playing a growing role in our energy systems in red and blue states across the country ... Restricting wind development in these regions is certain to increase consumer energy bills.”
A key difference from Trump’s first term is the economic case for new fossil-fuel extraction no longer adds up, especially in remote locations.
The United States’ oil output is dependent on shale oil and the cheapest sites have already been tapped
Energy futurist Michael Barnard of CleanTechnica is among those who believe oil and gas prices face a significant price drop that will challenge “drill, baby, drill!” economics.
“The United States’ oil output is dependent on shale oil and the cheapest sites have already been tapped. Peak oil demand is upon us with China pivoting to electric vehicles of all scales and other countries following more slowly,” he says. “The global majors who consolidated the United States’ shale sites are increasingly going to leave them undeveloped. Policy won’t bring an expansion of oil under those conditions.”
Transitioning to renewables has gathered pace as states, large cities and corporations are signed up – though it is happening too slowly given global emission trends.
The other big trend Trump has little influence on is growth in the global green economy, worth over $10 trillion annually, says climatologist Prof Mark Maslin of University College London. “In the US there are at least 10 million jobs in the green economy compared with 300,000 in the fossil fuel industry. Hence, if you want to grow your economy and make jobs then investment in the green economy will be essential.”
The transition to EVs is opening factories and putting people back to work across the country, says Katherine García, director of US environmental group Sierra Club’s clean transportation for all campaign.
“Instead of building upon progress we’ve made, Donald Trump remains intent on fearmongering around EVs and taking the US back in time while the rest of the world moves forward on auto innovation. Rolling back vehicle emission safeguards harms our health, our wallets and our climate,” she says.
The question is whether decarbonisation and electrification will take place despite Trump or because of him, says Prof Chris Hilson, director of the Reading Centre for Climate and Justice.
The US could start to look like Russia and Cuba once did with old cars not found anywhere else
“With Elon Musk’s influence, we might have expected a push to position the US as a new energy powerhouse, with a great lithium industry, a resurgent nuclear industry and an internationally competitive EV auto and battery industry. Trump is a businessman. And he likes to win. Sticking to a fossil-fuel economy is not likely to position the US economy for the win. That’s not a matter of climate, it’s business.”
Whether rollback on promoting EVs is window-dressing for his base or something more fundamental remains to be seen, Hilson says.
“If it’s the latter, then the US auto industry risks becoming even more left behind in the race against China. The US could even start to look like Russia and Cuba once did, with a nation of old-tech cars not found anywhere else in the world. That would be an odd legacy.”
- Sign up for push alerts and have the best news, analysis and comment delivered directly to your phone
- Find The Irish Times on WhatsApp and stay up to date
- Our In The News podcast is now published daily – Find the latest episode here
