Even with claims of being an environmentalist, many groups across the country are looking towards the new administration with concern over the future.
With Donald Trump’s recent victory in the US presidential election, many have turned towards his climate policy as one of his most alarming talking points. Even as he claims that he’s an environmentalist and that his last term saw the “cleanest” air and water in the country, his policy positions indicate otherwise. Trump supports increased oil drilling and has often called the climate crisis a “hoax”. Many have sounded alarms, calling this new administration and its flirting with conservative agenda a “game over for climate progress in the US”. But in order to properly understand what a Trump presidency will mean for the United States’ climate policy, one needs to evaluate the actual plans and assess what their potential impact will be.
One of Trump’s key focus-points throughout his campaign has been a return to fossil fuels, in particular, oil drilling. In his victory speech at the close of the election, he stated, “We have more liquid gold, oil and gas. We have more liquid gold than any country in the world.” These comments come after his first term in office saw many attempts to roll back regulations and embrace fossil fuels. Due to “sloppiness” in their legislation, however, nearly 88% of the lawsuits filed by the Natural Resources Defence Council (NRDC) were resolved. This time around, however, he has put an emphasis on picking more qualified cabinet members that, combined with a Republican controlled Congress, will have a higher chance at successfully overturning some of the regulations surrounding American fossil fuel production.
His pick for the head of the Interior Department, North Dakota Governor Doug Burgum, is a prime example of this. This department is largely responsible for the protection of the country’s natural lands, as well as communication with the various native tribes that live there. Many of these millions of acres contain highly oil-rich land, including the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge. Plans to sell off the land were underway in 2017 and stopped under Biden, but as Governor Burgum has promised donors that Trump will stop Biden’s “attack” on fossil fuels, the future of the refuge and land like it has suddenly been put into question.
In addition to the rolling back of regulations, many environmentalists have fired back against his pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which is responsible for monitoring the overall environmental impact of the country in a wide variety of sectors. Lee Zeldin, a congressman from New York, has claimed that as head of the EPA, he will “Restore US energy dominance […] and make the US the global leader of AI […] while protecting access to clean air and water.”
Several prominent environmental groups have criticised this pick. The executive director of the Sierra Club, Ben Jealous, released a statement calling Zeldin “an unqualified, anti-American worker nominee who opposes efforts to safeguard our clean air and water.” Additionally, Jeremy Symons, a senior analyst at the EPA, told NBC that this pick is in-line with Trump’s efforts to slash the agency’s budget. These statements, while alarming, do have a solid foundation. Zeldin has voted against several climate protection bills before, including the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in 2022, which has since led to over 380 billion dollars in clean energy investments. Some also pointed to the fact that Zeldin has not had much experience in roles related to the environment, instead sitting on committees for foreign affairs and financial services.
However, Trump’s policies may not spell a complete disaster for the United States’ impact on the climate. While his presidency may stall efforts on the national level, many experts point out that efforts on the state and private level will continue, just that they may just not be as explicit about advertising their projects. A study from non-partisan group E2 has shown that the clean energy industry is expanding across America. This is due in large part to the Inflation Reduction Act facilitating these advancements, 60% of which are in Republican districts, despite a unanimous decision from Republicans in the House of Representatives to attempt to block the bill, in a 220-to-213 vote.
While it’s difficult to say exactly where the new presidential administration will take climate policy, many projects will continue, especially as manufacturing for these technologies gets cheaper and expands the number of jobs in the industry. Looking at the situation as a whole, it becomes clear that even with the incoming administration being one that is not particularly climate-friendly, it’s important to look beneath the surface at work being done on the state or even local level.
