Including the reduction of federal regulations on fossil fuel production, a re-evaluation of the Clean Power Plan aimed at curbing carbon emissions from power plants, and the advancement of infrastructure projects like the Dakota Access Pipeline, which raised concerns about environmental protection and indigenous rights.

These actions signaled a dramatic shift in the U.S. approach to climate change, prioritizing economic growth and energy independence over environmental considerations.

Former President Joe Biden prioritized climate change during his administration, implementing various policies to address the issue; however, former President Donald Trump is rapidly reversing many of these initiatives. This rollback may face legal challenges, but it highlights a significant shift in environmental policy and priorities, reflecting a broader ideological divide on climate action between the two administrations.

Experts express concern over Trump’s rollback of global climate initiatives, increased domestic fossil fuel production, and the removal of electric vehicle incentives, particularly as 2024 becomes Earth’s hottest year on record. Climate scientists warn that escalating temperatures are linked to extreme weather events, which are already impacting millions, underscoring the urgent need for robust climate action to mitigate these effects.

“These orders will make our air dirtier, make people sicker, make energy more expensive, and make our communities less prepared for extreme weather,” wrote Ayana Elizabeth Johnson, a marine biologist, policy expert and author who co-founded the non-profit think tank Urban Ocean Lab.

Pulling the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement

Trump declared an energy emergency via executive order amid a promise to “drill, baby, drill.”

The order emphasizes the government’s commitment to expanding oil and gas production, leveraging powers such as eminent domain and the Defense Production Act to facilitate access to private land and resources deemed essential for national interests. This approach suggests a strategic prioritization of energy independence and increased production capabilities amidst rising energy demands.

Experts are challenging the characterization of the energy supply as “inadequate,” questioning whether this assessment is valid and highlighting potential oversights in the analysis that informed the order. Their concerns suggest that the assessment may not fully capture the complexities of the energy market and could lead to misinformed policy decisions.

“The reality is that the United States is well-supplied with energy in all of its forms,” said Gary Dirks, senior director of the Global Futures Laboratory at Arizona State University. Dirks said he thinks the move is actually more targeted at bringing down prices at the pump.

“It’s important to note that the United States right now is the largest producer of oil of any nation in history. And we got to that point under the Biden administration, not because of the Biden administration’s policies necessarily, but because of policies that have been ongoing for four decades,” he said.

Faster permitting for energy; harsh words for Endangered Species Act and Arctic protections

One section of the order declaring an energy emergency states that the Endangered Species Act cannot be an obstacle to energy development.

Gib Brogan from Oceana emphasizes that weakening the Endangered Species Act could significantly harm various endangered species, such as whales and sea turtles, while also facilitating fossil fuel development in the U.S., potentially accelerating their decline and extinction.

Trump also opened up areas in the pristine Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for drilling. Biden had previously both restricted and approved drilling in other parts of the Arctic, part of a long process mired in litigation and complicated by political battles.

“I would begin by pointing out that there was an attempt to lease for oil drilling recently and nobody bid,” Dirks said. “I don’t actually think that the Alaskan National Wildlife Refuge is an exciting place for oil and gas exploration.”

Preserving biodiversity is crucial for maintaining ecosystem stability, resilience, and health, and it supports essential services like pollination, clean air, and water. Ongoing concerns among scientists and environmental groups underscore the urgent need for effective conservation strategies to mitigate habitat loss, climate change, and pollution, ensuring that diverse species can coexist and thrive for future generations.

“The Arctic is a very fragile system,” said Peter Schlosser, vice president and vice provost of global futures at Arizona State. Schlosser added that drilling there would disrupt the land and sea, and that potential contamination or oil spills are more difficult to clean up there due to low temperatures.

Revoke Biden’s goals on electric vehicles

Trump promised to eliminate what he incorrectly calls Biden’s “electric vehicle mandate.”

What that means in practice is that the order will revoke a non-binding goal set by Biden to have EVs make up half of new cars sold by 2030. He will also likely seek repeal of a $7,500 tax credit for new EV purchases approved by Congress as part of Biden’s landmark 2022 climate law, the Inflation Reduction Act.

Jessica Caldwell highlights the dilemmas faced by automakers as they navigate long-term decisions amid shifting industry trends towards electric vehicles and an unexpected reduction in federal support, complicating their strategic planning and investment in future technologies.

“We do think that the long-term end goal here is going to be electrification. It’s just the timeline it seems is uncertain right now,” she said.

Eliminate a push for environmental justice

In recent policy shifts, the government appears to be moving away from incorporating environmental justice considerations into the review of new pollution-emitting facilities. This could potentially exacerbate the existing disparities faced by poor and minority communities, who often bear a disproportionate burden of environmental hazards and pollution. The lack of emphasis on environmental justice may undermine efforts to ensure equitable treatment and protection for all communities in the face of industrial expansion and environmental degradation.

Rena Payan, the chief program officer at Justice Outside, has expressed strong concern over recent actions that she perceives as a significant regression in the fight against environmental discrimination, emphasizing that these moves threaten to undo decades of advancements made in promoting equity and justice in environmental policy and practice.

Peggy Shepard emphasizes that while Trump’s decision to cut federal support will be a challenge, many local organizations have historically operated without such funding and are resilient in their efforts to protect vulnerable communities. This suggests that despite the increased burden, these groups are equipped to continue their advocacy and maintain their mission of environmental justice.

“What I’m grappling right now with is both the grief of these losses, and the fact that we were on an upward swing, if you will, just weeks ago,” said Jade Begay, an Indigenous rights and climate organizer.

***
The article is based on this AP story.