1 week Ago
W ith the Republicans firmly in control of the U.S. government, a seismic shift in American climate policy is imminent, threatening to unravel years of slow but hard-earned progress in addressing the climate crisis.
With president-elect Donald Trump referring to climate change as a “hoax”, the most devastating effect will be a diplomatic retreat in global negotiations, along with a possible withdrawal from the Paris Agreement (PA). U.S.
climate negotiators will likely explain inaction with references to “domestic political constraints”, which American environmental advocates, frustrated by limited options, may also use as a shield while exhorting other major economies in the global South to take up the slack. Also Read | How much can US president-elect Donald Trump derail global climate action? An alarming project proposal Project 2025, developed by The Heritage Foundation, brings together the vision of many conservative interests and is expected to be unleashed from the start of Mr. Trump’s presidency, even though he distanced himself from it during his campaign.
It envisions a reduction in federal climate science programmes across several departments. The installation of politically appointed “science advisers” at the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) signals a concerning shift away from independent scientific oversight. This accompanies the potential dismantling of the EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding, which forms the legal backbone of climate regulation by identifying greenhouse gases (GHGs) as public health threats. This implies that GHG emissions may no longer be included in future environmental legislation.
The plan also calls for ending green subsidies and opposing “climate reparations” to developing nations, effectively abandoning any pretence of climate justice. The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) of the Biden administration, the most ambitious U.S.
climate legislation to date, is especially targeted by Project 2025, but it may oddly survive due to its widespread economic benefits, particularly in Republican districts that have seen substantial clean energy investments and job creation. Fossil fuel companies anticipate expanded operational freedom — a stance not unique to one party, as evidenced by previous bipartisan equivocation on fracking. Scientific institutions that work on climate change could face severe cuts in federal funding.
In particular, research into renewable energy and battery storage faces significant reduction, handicapping the ability to compete in the growing global clean energy economy. These changes come when climate-driven disasters demand a coordinated, robust response. Indeed, it is mystifying how climate disinformation and misinformation can thrive in an era of intensifying climate-induced disasters, as witnessed in South America with hurricanes Helene and Ida.
As this false messaging deepens under Mr. Trump, the public will be more disconnected from the scientific realities of climate change. The proposed dismantling of climate science infrastructure is more than just a policy reversal; it is a retreat from reality itself, one that future generations will judge harshly.
EDITORIAL | Testing time: On climate action and President Trump Unfortunately, climate change will not pause for political convenience. While policy may shift with elections, the physics of GHG emissions is consistent. Based on the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Synthesis Report on Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs), we are significantly off track from meeting both NDC commitments and PA temperature goals.
Current NDCs would lead to global emissions of 51.5 Gt of CO2 equivalent by 2030, a level only 2.6% lower than in 2019.
This falls far short of the about 43% reduction needed for the 1.5°C target and 27% for the 2°C target. Even with full implementation of all NDCs, we are heading towards temperature increases of up to 2.
8°C of warming. The current trajectory would consume 86% of the remaining carbon budget by 2030 for the desirable target of 1.5°C.
The report emphasises an urgent need for increased NDC ambition, substantial over-achievement of current NDCs, or both. Without enhanced action, the required post-2030 emission reductions would need to be dramatically steeper to compensate for this slow start. The 29th global meeting of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (COP29) is going on in Azerbaijan.
The lame-duck Biden administration will be reluctant to make major commitments on finance. As was the case under previous Republican administrations, one can expect American delegates at COP29 to blame their political leaders for their inaction, while aware that the U.S.
is responsible for about a quarter of GHGs generated by humanity. Also Read | Climate experts worry about Donald Trump’s re-election impact Rays of hope Still, there may be reasons for cautious hope. Globally, the clean energy transition has gained considerable momentum, driven by market forces.
Even Republican-led States in the U.S. have embraced renewable energy investments, recognising the economic opportunities they bring to their communities.
The likely survival of the IRA demonstrates how clean energy’s economic benefits can create durable political constituencies. U.S.
negotiators at the climate conference will tell us that States, cities, and businesses increasingly view climate action as essential to their long-term prosperity. While there is room for domestic action within the U.S.
, we must be clear-eyed. The U.S.
will not support global climate finance or take responsibility for being the largest cumulative emitter of GHGs. Climate justice will seriously get stalled at a moment when the world can least afford delay. The challenge lies in preserving and building upon existing progress, while finding new paths in an increasingly hostile international political environment.
Sujatha Byravan is a scientist based in Chennai; Sudhir Chella Rajan is a professor at IIT Madras. Views are personal Published - November 18, 2024 12:59 am IST Copy link Email Facebook Twitter Telegram LinkedIn WhatsApp Reddit climate change (politics) / USA / US PRESIDENTIAL POLLS / climate change / environmental issues / environmental politics.
