With Donald Trump's presidency passed, a sweep of executive orders has been passed, and some of them have raised alarm. The anti-climate executive orders have sparked discussion all around the globe. With the impacts of climate change ever more palpable, especially in developing countries, it is of the utmost urgency to scale up rather than scale down climate action. However, the scenario under President Trump has been extensively reversed.
The “Unleashing American Energy” agenda includes a proposal to suspend funding from the Infrastructure Investment & Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act pending review. Federal agencies are directed to develop and implement plans to suspend, revise, or repeal regulations that hinder domestic energy development, particularly those affecting oil, natural gas, coal, hydropower, biofuels, critical minerals, and nuclear resources- notably excluding solar, and wind. The agenda also promotes exploration on federal lands and waters, including the Outer Continental Shelf, and revokes mandates for electric vehicles. The rationale behind Trump’s order is the diversification of consumer choices towards adopting a particular type of vehicle; Biden’s electric vehicle mandate set a goal to have half of the new cars sold by 2030 be electric vehicles.
Another executive order sought is unlocking Alaska’s vast energy resources by promoting fossil fuel extraction and exports. Additional directives included a temporary pause on Outer Continental Shelf leases for offshore wind projects and a regulatory freeze order. Executive actions targeting civil service employees at federal agencies could also impact climate policies. For instance, Executive Order 13957 aimed to remove job protections for tens of thousands of federal workers. Other orders sought to roll back diversity, equity, and inclusion programs, implement a federal hiring plan, and impose a 90-day hiring freeze, excluding positions related to immigration, national security, and public safety.
Trump’s campaign promises could lead to an emission of an additional 4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and that is equivalent to the combined yearly emissions of the European Union and Japan
The set of such orders is bound to have the negative repercussions of climate change on biodiversity, as well. One section of the order that declares an energy emergency states that the Endangered Species Act cannot impede energy development. Previously, the Endangered Species Act has served to decline the extinction of potentially endangered species.
Trump’s campaign promises could lead to an emission of an additional 4 billion tonnes of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and that is equivalent to the combined yearly emissions of the European Union and Japan or the annual emissions of the world’s 140 lowest-emitting nations combined. The US withdrawal from the Paris Agreement has portrayed the nation as an unreliable partner, with potential ramifications across different sectors of the economy. However, this elevates the position of other economies like China, Europe, Brazil, and India to benefit as global climate leadership shifts towards them. This is also because, with such orders, the US will also be reneging on financial commitments to assist developing nations in grappling with climate change. This can weaken critical alliances.
However, while the effect will be felt globally, the sliver of hope should not be let go of. In response to these executive orders, more than 5000 state and local leaders across the US committed to supporting the goals of the Paris Agreement. These leaders collectively represent 63% of the country’s population and account for 74% of its GDP. Governors in 24 states and territories have also pledged their support, signaling continued climate ambition despite federal setbacks.
While some of the orders will be taken up immediately, certain actions necessitate the help of Congress and will be held up in court. It is important to understand that while President Trump has passed these orders, cities, states, businesses, and subnational actors have, in the past, and can still demonstrate their ability to advance climate goals independently. Due to previous climate-positive policies, it is logical to assume that state and local leaders have the capacity, tools, and determination to persist in reducing pollution and fostering safer, healthier communities for future generations. For instance, in 2024, the administration fulfilled Biden’s pledge to deliver $11.4 billion annually for international climate finance. Much of this funding was not directly allocated by Congress but instead achieved through the climate benefits of broader development and conservation programs, as well as investments made by development finance institutions.