Fatima Gilani
Contributing Writer
The year 2024 has made one thing clear: climate change is no longer a distant threat, but a present reality reshaping our planet. This year is on track to become the hottest on record, making this the eleventh year in a row that this record has been broken. We’ve seen the past few months bearing the brunt of supercharged hurricanes, unexpected floods and drought-fueled wildfires wreaking havoc across the United States. Amid this devastation, pausing aggressive actions to combat climate change — such as reducing U.S. carbon emissions and transitioning to cleaner energy sources — is a risk we cannot afford. Scientists have long emphasized the urgency of these measures to curb planetary warming. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued a stark warning in 2021: no time is left for denial or delay.
The decisions made by the incoming Trump administration on climate change will have lasting effects, not only over the next four years, but for decades to come. Although it may be too early to predict an exact trajectory, President-elect Donald Trump’s statements, actions during his first term and key appointments offer some indication of what to expect.
Trump has previously referred to climate change as a “hoax.”In 2017, he withdrew the United States from the Paris Climate Accord, arguing that it would impose “draconian financial and economic burdens” on the country. This stance overlooks the mounting toll that climate change is already taking on the U.S.
A key document that may shape the administration’s climate approach is “Project 2025,” a 900-page report by the conservative think tank, The Heritage Foundation. This report outlines a policy agenda that proposes significant changes to how federal agencies manage the natural resources that are directly impacted by climate change.
How will the new administration tackle climate challenges and shape America’s green future? As the new administration takes office, several critical climate and environmental issues will be crucial to monitor — they will determine how the U.S. addresses climate challenges in the years ahead. These include potential shifts in regulatory approaches, federal support for renewable energy and a broader policy framework for mitigating climate impacts.
Future efforts to curb U.S. carbon emissions hinge on dramatically reducing greenhouse gas production from activities like burning fossil fuels. To avoid the worst possible effects of climate change, scientists have set a best-case scenario: limiting global warming to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels by the end of the century. However, that goal will be increasingly difficult to reach, as many of the world’s most powerful nations delay cutting their emissions. Global emissions must drop to 57% of 2019 levels by 2030 to meet this target. Achieving net-zero carbon emissions, where emissions are balanced by the amount of carbon removed from the atmosphere, remains possible, but would require coordinated global action. While progress has been frustratingly slow, there were signs of hope at the Dec. 2023 climate summit in Dubai, where world leaders agreed to align emissions goals with the targets set by scientists. They also committed to increasing renewable energy generation and phasing out fossil fuel subsidies.
The Biden administration pledged to cut U.S. emissions by 50-52% of 2005 levels by 2030 focusing on reducing transportation-related emissions through a variety of targeted actions (i.e. encouraging the widespread adoption of electric vehicles through tax credits). These policies, however, will face significant challenges under the Trump administration. During his previous term, Trump rejected efforts to reduce emissions, focusing instead on boosting fossil fuel production and reducing federal investment in energy research. Trump has promised to withdraw the U.S. from the Paris Agreement again and prioritize fossil fuel expansion, including rolling back Biden-era tax credits for electric vehicles. This action will slow down progress in reducing emissions from the transportation sector.
At the Nov. 2024 COP29 summit in Baku, Azerbaijan, the question of how the Trump administration would approach climate change dominated discussions. The summit concluded with an agreement that, by 2035, developed nations would contribute $300 billion annually to help developing countries cope with climate impacts. This commitment will extend beyond the current U.S. administration and continue supporting climate action even if the next four years see a shift in U.S. policies.
The future of America’s climate policy
The future of the U.S. “green transition” faces uncertainty, particularly with Trump’s selection of Chris Wright, a Liberty Energy oil executive, to head the Department of Energy. Wright has expressed skepticism about the science of climate change. He claimed in 2023 that there has been no increase in the frequency or intensity of natural disasters like hurricanes, tornadoes, or floods, despite numerous studies presenting clear evidence that climate change is exacerbating extreme weather events, including heatwaves, stronger hurricane winds and rapid intensification of storms like Helene and Milton.
Wright has also downplayed the ongoing energy transition, stating that the U.S. is “not in the midst of an energy transition.” This is simply not true. In 2023, renewable energy accounted for about 23% of U.S. power generation, enough to power 90 million homes for a year. Solar and wind energy, in particular, are growing rapidly, with projections from the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicting that renewables will provide 44% of U.S. power by 2050.
The impact Wright might have on halting this transition is unclear. If confirmed as Energy Secretary, he will oversee critical projects in renewable energy, carbon capture, direct air capture and hydrogen, many of which are funded by the 2022 Inflation Reduction Act. Wright could shift focus back toward fossil fuels, including domestic oil, which Trump has referred to as “liquid gold.” The direction he takes will be pivotal in determining whether the U.S. continues to advance its green energy goals or reverts back to fossil fuel dependence.
Project 2025
Future U.S. climate research faces significant challenges under the proposed conservative “roadmap” of Project 2025, which targets key climate research programs. The report suggests that the Trump administration should use executive orders to overhaul or even eliminate federal climate change research initiatives, including the U.S. Global Change Research Program. This program has been instrumental in revealing the impacts of climate change and produces the National Climate Assessment, a critical report on how climate change is affecting the U.S.
Project 2025 also proposes cuts to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), a key agency in U.S. climate research and weather forecasting. The report suggests downsizing NOAA, disbanding its primary climate research arm, and limiting the National Weather Service to only data collection, with forecasting privatized. Privatizing weather forecasts could undermine the free, public access to vital weather warnings, creating inequalities in how life-saving information is distributed.
Trump’s pick to head the Department of Commerce, billionaire Howard Lutnick, has expressed strong support for cutting billions from federal agencies, including those responsible for climate and environmental research. While Lutnick has not announced specific plans for NOAA yet, his history of advocating for reductions in federal spending suggests that U.S. climate research and weather forecasting could face significant setbacks under his leadership. These moves could have long-term consequences on the country’s ability to monitor and respond to climate change.
The future of U.S. climate policy and research is uncertain, with significant shifts on the horizon under the incoming Trump administration. The proposed rollback of climate action initiatives, from reducing greenhouse gas emissions to dismantling key climate research programs, could impede progress made in addressing the climate crisis. While the “green transition” and climate science continue to gain momentum globally, the administration’s stance on fossil fuel expansion, privatizing weather forecasts, and limiting federal climate research may hinder critical efforts to mitigate climate change. The direction taken by the Trump administration in the coming years will have lasting implications for both the U.S. and the world, determining whether the country accelerates or stalls in its response to the climate emergency.