A Crumbling Planet in Donald’s hands: What Trump’s victory in 2024 means for climate change and global policy

With a renewed Trump presidency on the horizon, his stance on climate and energy raises pressing questions about the direction of US and global climate action. Known for skepticism towards climate science and favoring deregulation, Trump has outlined a path that contrasts sharply with the green initiatives spearheaded by the Biden administration, from re-entering the Paris Climate Accord to rescinding funding from the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA). Trump’s views — describing climate initiatives as a "green scam" — suggest a radical policy shift that could challenge both national and international climate objectives.

Trump’s climate record and proposed policies

During his previous term, Trump took a distinct approach to environmental regulation, withdrawing from the Paris Climate Accord and dismantling over 100 environmental rules, mostly around emission standards, clean water, and public land protections. Trump argued that these regulations were burdensome for the American economy and placed it at a disadvantage on the global stage. His administration supported fossil fuel industries, eased restrictions on methane emissions, and championed oil drilling, including controversial efforts to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for exploration.

Looking to 2024, Trump has promised to “drill, baby, drill” to make the US energy independent, proposing an expansion of oil and gas drilling, and loosening permitting processes. We might even see a re-approval the highly controversial Keystone XL pipeline construction, which Biden had blocked. If implemented, these actions would likely increase the US’s greenhouse gas emissions, putting the country at odds with international climate goals.

Impact on the Paris Climate Agreement and global efforts

Should Trump return to office, many speculate that one of his first actions could be to exit the Paris Agreement again. This 2015 accord aims to limit global warming to well below 2°C above pre-industrial levels, a target many countries consider essential for averting catastrophic climate impacts. The Biden administration’s reentry into the accord underscored a commitment to global cooperation, but Trump’s approach — characterising the agreement as an unfair "wealth transfer" — reflects his belief that the US should prioritise economic autonomy over climate action.
A Trump-led US withdrawal would likely affect other countries' commitments as well, especially developing nations dependent on US funding through initiatives like the Green Climate Fund, which Trump criticised as financially draining. Analysts fear that without US leadership, global cooperation on climate may weaken, and other large emitters, such as China and India, might feel less pressure to curb their emissions aggressively.

Implications for renewable energy and electric vehicles

Trump has shown strong opposition to subsidies and mandates promoting EVs, criticising Biden’s goal for 50% EVs by 2030 as unrealistic and detrimental to traditional auto jobs. Trump argues that such mandates increase costs for consumers and prefers a market-driven approach that doesn’t “push” Americans toward EVs. This could halt or reverse the rapid EV infrastructure buildout, leaving American manufacturers potentially less competitive as global auto markets increasingly embrace electrification.

Trump has also promised to cut back on renewable energy subsidies, which he views as artificially propping up a “niche” industry. Wind and solar, growing under Biden’s policies and supported by the IRA, might see reduced investment, stalling progress towards the administration’s goal of a 100% carbon-free power sector by 2035. In place of renewables, Trump advocates — albeit cautiously — for more nuclear energy, arguing it provides consistent, “zero-emission” power without relying on foreign components.

Economic and environmental costs of fossil fuel focus

While Trump frames increased fossil fuel production as a path to energy independence, experts argue it could yield mixed economic and environmental outcomes. Expanding drilling on federal lands and off US coasts might boost jobs and reduce reliance on imports, yet it risks escalating greenhouse gas emissions. The focus on fossil fuels also raises concerns about environmental impacts — particularly in ecologically sensitive areas like the Arctic — where drilling could disrupt wildlife and fragile ecosystems.
Moreover, Trump’s approach might create friction with states pushing for clean energy transitions, such as California and New York, which have ambitious climate goals. These states may resist federal mandates on fossil fuel development, setting the stage for legal battles and further polarisation on climate policy within the US

International reactions and the future of climate policy

International climate activists worry that a Trump 2.0 administration would discourage other countries from fulfilling their own climate commitments. With COP29 climate talks approaching in Baku, Azerbaijan, a Trump presidency would likely put the US at odds with global goals, slowing progress at these crucial negotiations.

Trump’s stance could also embolden climate-skeptical governments worldwide, as they may see reduced consequences for inaction. China, for example, might interpret a US retreat as an opportunity to scale back its own commitments without fearing international backlash. This lack of pressure risks an intensifying climate crisis, especially for vulnerable regions like Southeast Asia and Africa, where extreme weather events are already reshaping economies and communities.

Trump’s climate policy contrasts sharply with his predecessor’s environmental approach, leaning heavily toward traditional energy sources and away from multilateral climate commitments. While some Americans may welcome his promises to cut regulatory "red tape," the broader consequences for both national and global climate goals could be significant. Trump’s potential 2024 victory would likely rekindle debates around climate science, renewables, and economic sustainability — and may push global climate action into uncertain territory at a time when scientists urge immediate, unified efforts.