Following his inauguration speech in which he said America needed to ‘Drill baby drill,’ Sophie Layton discusses what Trump's second term as president may mean for the planet.
US President Donald Trump making his entrance at his second inauguration. Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons.
On November 5th 2024, the eyes of the world watched, as the results of the U.S. Presidential Election began to be announced. The race, which had been tight ever since Democrat nominee Kamala Harris replaced the incumbent Joe Biden, was coming to an end. Everyone predicted that it would be close and that it could be days before the results were known. But a mere few hours later, reality came crashing in. Donald Trump was back.
Gaining 312 electoral college votes, much more than the required 270 to win, Trump conclusively beat his opponent, with over two million votes separating him and Harris. Flipping six states, as well as retaining the majority in the House of Representatives and gaining a majority in the Senate, the Republican Party was jubilant. But for many in American society and across the world, the worst possible outcome had been realised. But with Trump and his Vice-President JD Vance now beginning their four-year term, what could Trump’s fiery re-election mean for our flame-engulfed planet?
Firstly, let’s look at Trump’s record in his first term, and that of his Cabinet selections. Between 2017 and 2021, Donald Trump had two Secretaries of Energy – Rick Perry (2017-2019) and Dan Brouillette (2019-2021) – and two Administrators of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) – Scott Pruitt (2017-2018) and Andrew Wheeler (2018-2021), each with a colourful portfolio. Perry sat on the Board of Directors for fossil fuel companies Energy Transfer Partners and Sunoco from 2015-2016, before joining the board of LE GP, a partner firm. Brouillette, following his time in office, was named President of Sempra Infrastructure in 2021, a company which focuses on electricity and natural gas infrastructure.
Add into this mix Pruitt, a climate change denier, and Wheeler, who backed the limitation of scientific research use into climate change and refused to fine companies for breaking environmental regulations during the Covid-19 pandemic, and you have an unsavoury mix, to say the least – and that’s before we consider Trump himself.
Trump launched his ‘America First’ plan, which emphasised fossil fuel use, rolled back on many Obama-era environmental protections, proposed a 31% budget cut for the EPA, and most notably, withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord, which committed to limiting global temperature rise to 2ºC, ideally 1.5ºC. This move was not only unprecedented, but largely criticised, with his successor, Joe Biden, returning to the agreement on his first day in office in 2021.
But that was 2017-2021. Trump’s second term has only just begun, but if the forecast is to be believed, it’s going to be a rough four years. Trump’s Cabinet contains Chris Wright, the CEO of Liberty Energy, an onshore oilfield services company, as his Secretary of Energy, and Lee Zeldin as Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the same Lee Zeldin who in 2014 “expressed doubts about the severity” of climate change and pledged to reverse New York’s ban on hydraulic fracturing (‘fracking’).
And Trump? Well, he has already, dramatically, pulled America out of the Paris Climate Accord during his inauguration celebrations, as well as claiming in his inaugural address that he would “drill, baby, drill”. But as well as this, Trump’s policies of putting the United States first at the, often, sacrifice of other nations risks another form of climate action – international climate finance. When countries develop industrially, as both Britain and the U.S. did in the 1800s, fossil fuels are often the cheapest and most efficient forms of developing industry rapidly, whether this is through consumption or marketing.
In an attempt to offset this, countries often provide funding to developing nations in an attempt to limit consumption and the associated environmental damage. If the Trump administration were to reduce or eliminate this, it could have significant ramifications for many countries, as well as for the international community collectively.
Donald Trump and Nigel Farage. Image Credit: Wikimedia Commons.
But we shouldn’t consider Trump in isolation. His victory in November joins a wider phenomenon of a Rightward political shift, with victories in the European Union and France, increasing popularity in the United Kingdom, and impending victories in Germany and Canada. Alongside Trump’s influential friends, including Reform UK leader Nigel Farage and tech billionaire Elon Musk, it is unlikely we will see the incoming President backing down anytime soon.
So what can be done? Well, climate activists and advocates must stand firm. It is clear that Trump will be unlikely to dissuade from any course of action he chooses, so it is the responsibility of everyone to stand steadfast for greater climate action. It is also incumbent on us all to ensure our own elected representatives are backing strong climate action. We may emit a much lower level of emissions than the Americans, but we cannot let a Trump administration allow climate change awareness and action to cease.
The impending return of Donald Trump is no good development for the climate, and it is likely that the next four years will be filled with painful developments. But we cannot let this slow us down. If Trump is doubling his efforts to end climate action, we must redouble ours to keep it alive.
Comments