fbpx

The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency

The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency
18
Jan

On January 20, 2025, Donald Trump assumes office as the 47th President of the United States, marking the beginning of his second term. As speculation rises over the potential impact of his presidency, one of the most pressing questions concerns its implications for the global environment. Trump’s previous tenure (2017–2021) was marked by significant rollbacks of environmental protections and a shift away from climate leadership. If reelected, his policies would likely have profound consequences for global efforts to combat climate change and preserve ecological balance. However, supporters argue that his approach to energy independence and economic growth could have some positive implications for innovation and energy security. – The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency

The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency

Withdrawal from Global Climate Commitments – The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency

During his first term, Donald Trump announced the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris Agreement, an international treaty signed by 195 countries aimed at limiting global temperature rise to below 2°C above pre-industrial levels. Although President Joe Biden rejoined the agreement in 2021, a second Trump administration could repeat the withdrawal.

%Cleaning Janitorial Services in Lagos %
The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency: Image credit – science.feedback.org

The U.S. contributes approximately 13% of global greenhouse gas emissions, making it the second-largest emitter after China. Its participation is crucial for achieving the Paris Agreement’s targets. A U.S. withdrawal would not only disrupt global climate cooperation but might embolden other nations to weaken their commitments. For instance, countries like Brazil and Russia could scale back their climate ambitions, citing the U.S. as a precedent.

On the other hand, Trump’s energy policies prioritize economic growth and reducing reliance on foreign energy sources, which could stimulate domestic innovation. Increased investments in infrastructure and technology to enhance fossil fuel efficiency may lead to advancements that could later be applied to renewable energy sectors.

Expansion of Fossil Fuel Production

Donald Trump’s “energy dominance” agenda heavily emphasized expanding fossil fuel production. Between 2017 and 2020, the U.S. saw a 12% increase in oil production and a 9% rise in natural gas extraction (U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2021). The administration approved major projects like the Keystone XL pipeline and opened millions of acres of public lands for oil and gas drilling. If reelected, Trump has pledged to further deregulate the energy sector, lifting restrictions on offshore drilling and coal mining.

According to a 2021 report by the Global Carbon Project, the energy sector accounts for 73% of global carbon dioxide emissions. Increased fossil fuel production in the U.S. would likely exacerbate global emissions, making it harder for the world to stay within the Paris Agreement’s 1.5°C target. Furthermore, expanded drilling on public lands could threaten biodiversity hotspots and indigenous lands.

However, proponents of Trump’s policies argue that energy independence reduces geopolitical tensions linked to energy trade and enhances national security. Additionally, lower energy costs driven by increased production may benefit consumers and industries, potentially fostering economic stability.

Rollback of Environmental Regulations

Trump’s first term was marked by an unprecedented rollback of environmental regulations. Over 125 environmental rules were either reversed or weakened, including those targeting air pollution, water quality, and wildlife protection (Harvard Law School Environmental Regulation Rollback Tracker, 2021). A notable example was the replacement of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan with the Affordable Clean Energy rule, which provided states more leeway to regulate power plant emissions, resulting in weaker pollution controls.

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under Trump reduced enforcement actions by 70% compared to the Obama administration. If this trend continues in a second term, the U.S. could see increased levels of air and water pollution, with adverse health effects. According to the American Lung Association, weakened air quality standards contributed to an additional 7,140 premature deaths annually between 2016 and 2020.

On a positive note, the reduced regulatory burden could spur economic growth in sectors that were previously constrained by stringent environmental rules. Industries such as manufacturing and construction may experience lower operational costs, potentially creating jobs and boosting the economy.

Threats to Clean Energy Transition

While market forces have driven the growth of renewable energy, federal support remains critical for scaling clean energy technologies. During Trump’s presidency, federal funding for clean energy research and development decreased by 20%. A second term could see further cuts to renewable energy initiatives and the possible repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which allocates $369 billion to clean energy projects (Congressional Budget Office, 2022).

The IRA has spurred private investments in renewables, with solar and wind capacity projected to increase by 40% by 2030. However, without federal incentives, these projections could be revised downward, slowing the global shift to cleaner energy sources. China, the global leader in renewable energy investments, could widen its lead, leaving the U.S. lagging in the clean energy race.

Conversely, Trump’s emphasis on reducing energy costs could encourage private sector investments in cleaner fossil fuel technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS). These technologies, while not a substitute for renewable energy, could play a role in mitigating emissions from existing energy sources.

Global Environmental Leadership and Diplomacy

The United States has historically played a pivotal role in shaping global environmental policies. Under Trump’s first term, this leadership waned significantly. The administration slashed contributions to international climate funds, such as the Green Climate Fund, which supports developing nations in their climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. By contrast, the Biden administration pledged $11.4 billion annually to global climate finance by 2024.

A second Trump term could eliminate these commitments, leaving vulnerable nations without crucial funding to combat climate change. For example, small island nations like the Maldives and Kiribati, which face existential threats from rising sea levels, could struggle to implement resilience measures.

On the other hand, Trump’s focus on national interests may encourage other nations to invest more heavily in self-reliant climate strategies. This shift could foster innovation and localized solutions to environmental challenges, particularly in emerging economies.

Potential Gains for the World Under Trump’s Second Term

Despite the challenges, there are areas where the world could benefit from Trump’s policies. For instance, his emphasis on energy independence could drive advancements in energy efficiency and extraction technologies. Breakthroughs in these areas could later be adapted for cleaner energy production, benefiting global energy markets.

Additionally, Trump’s deregulatory approach could encourage industries to innovate, leading to new technologies that balance environmental sustainability with economic growth. These innovations might include advancements in carbon capture, water conservation, and waste management, offering solutions that could be scaled globally.

Furthermore, Trump’s focus on bilateral trade deals could foster international collaborations in energy and infrastructure development, potentially benefiting emerging markets. By prioritizing economic growth, his administration could create a ripple effect of financial investments in regions that need them the most.

Impact on Biodiversity and Conservation

Trump’s environmental policies also posed risks to biodiversity. In 2019, his administration weakened the Endangered Species Act, allowing economic considerations to influence decisions on habitat protection. Furthermore, over 9 million acres of public lands were opened for logging and mining, endangering critical habitats (Center for Biological Diversity, 2021).

A second term could see further exploitation of natural resources, exacerbating biodiversity loss. According to the Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), around 1 million species are at risk of extinction, with habitat destruction being a primary driver.

However, streamlined processes for resource extraction could potentially fund restoration projects and conservation initiatives, particularly if industries are incentivized to reinvest in environmental stewardship.

Public Health Implications

Environmental rollbacks have direct consequences for public health. The Lancet Countdown on Health and Climate Change reported that climate change is exacerbating heatwaves, wildfires, and vector-borne diseases. Increased fossil fuel emissions could worsen these impacts, disproportionately affecting vulnerable populations.

For example, the 2020 wildfire season in the U.S. released over 112 million metric tons of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere, equivalent to the annual emissions of 24 million cars. Prolonged exposure to wildfire smoke led to respiratory illnesses, particularly among children and the elderly.

Nevertheless, lower energy costs and economic growth resulting from deregulation could improve access to healthcare and resources in underserved communities, indirectly improving public health outcomes.

Conclusion on The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency

A second Trump presidency would likely bring significant challenges to global environmental and climate efforts. From increased greenhouse gas emissions to weakened environmental regulations and diminished global climate leadership, the implications could be far-reaching. However, proponents argue that his policies could enhance energy independence, reduce costs, and drive innovation in energy technologies.

The trajectory of U.S. policies under Trump would not only impact its citizens but also reverberate across the globe, complicating international efforts to address the climate crisis. While Trump’s approach emphasizes economic growth and energy independence, it raises critical questions about the balance between development and sustainability. The global community must prepare for the potential shifts a second Trump term would bring and seek collaborative solutions to navigate these challenges.

Palmacedar Cleaning Limited is a cleaning and janitorial services company in Nigeria. Visit our cleaning website for more details.

Thank you for reading – The Environmental Fallout: Assessing the Global Impact of a 2nd Trump Presidency




  • Share:

Post a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *