Trump’s victory ‘major setback’ to climate action
Experts say that Donald Trump’s return to the White House would significantly hinder climate change action in the short term, though its long-term impact remains uncertain.
With global leaders preparing for the upcoming COP29 climate talks, Trump’s potential victory is seen as a major obstacle to progress on both emission reductions and funding for developing nations. As a well-known climate skeptic who has dismissed green energy initiatives as a “scam,” Trump poses a challenge to international efforts.
However, with renewable energy gaining momentum in the US and strong public support for wind and solar, Trump’s push to expand oil and gas production may have limited impact.
While climate change wasn’t a key issue in this year’s campaign, Trump’s likely actions in office could have more significant consequences than in 2017. At that time, he announced the US’s withdrawal from the Paris climate agreement, a landmark global accord aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Despite the initial shock, the agreement’s rules meant the US couldn’t formally leave until November 2020, a few months before Trump left office.
Should Trump withdraw again, the US would be out of the agreement within a year, allowing him three years to pursue his own agenda without being accountable to the UN or its regulations.
Although President Joe Biden’s negotiators will attend the COP talks in Azerbaijan, any agreements made will not be binding for the Trump administration. As Professor Richard Klein from the Stockholm Environment Institute put it, “The US at this COP is not just a lame duck, it’s a dead duck.” He added that without the US being able to commit, other countries like China may be less inclined to make commitments themselves.
In recent years, richer countries such as the US, UK, and EU states have tried to increase the funds available for developing countries to cope with climate change. But they also insist that big developing economies also contribute.
“The US basically wanted to have China cough up some money for that fund as well. Now they won’t be able to do that. That leaves China off the hook,” Prof Klein said.
Climate scientists say developing countries need billions of dollars of extra investment to become net zero, where they are not contributing to climate change, and stave off the effects of rising temperatures.
While the US might leave the Paris Agreement quite quickly, Trump would still be bound by other global efforts to fight climate change.
There have been reports that some of his supporters also want to turn their backs on these as well. Some have argued for a complete break from UN efforts on climate change, urging the president-elect to leave something called the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, the treaty that underpins global collective action to tackle climate change.
This was ratified by the US Senate, almost unanimously, in 1992. Legal experts are unclear on the process of leaving the treaty, but any effort by the US to leave would be seen as a body blow to the principle of multi-lateral action to tackle the world’s greatest threat.
As well as these headline-grabbing international actions, the new Trump administration is likely to push for a major ramp up of oil and gas exploration within the US, roll back environmental protections as well as impose heavy tariffs on electric vehicles and solar panels coming from China.
“You are looking at, overall, a ‘drill baby drill’ philosophy,” Dan Eberhart, chief executive officer of oilfield services company Canary LLC told Bloomberg News.
“You are going to see offshore lease sales, you are going to see pipelines move much quicker, you are going to see fracking on federal lands and a mindset that is focused on lowering energy costs for consumers.”
There was a big drop in the share price of turbine manufacturers on Wednesday, as fears grew that US offshore wind farms would be cancelled by a Trump presidency.
But in the longer term, it is not clear if the new president will turn back the clock for coal, oil and gas, or curtail the growth of sustainable energy sources.
For a start he faces opposition – and notably from within his own party.
Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which may ultimately channel $1 trillion of spending into green energy, has been hugely beneficial to Republican districts.
According to one analysis, some 85% of the money has been in areas that elected Republicans.
With energy watchdog the International Energy Agency reporting that global investment in clean technology is running at double the size of coal, oil and gas in 2024, the new US administration might not want to drive this type of green investment into other, more eager countries.
Climate leaders are putting a lot of faith in the fact that the transition to green energy will not be derailed by the new Trump administration.
“The result from this election will be seen as a major blow to global climate action,” said Christiana Figueres, the former UN climate chief.
“But it cannot and will not halt the changes under way to decarbonise the economy and meet the goals of the Paris agreement.”
