On Monday, President Donald Trump began his second term with an inaugural address. Announcement That the US has a “national energy emergency”. to commit to Explore the country’s vast oil and gas reserves.Trump rejected the overwhelming majority of climate scientists who say burning fossil fuels releases greenhouse gases that overheat the planet.
Instead of trying to curb emissions of these gases, Trump signed executive orders pulling the United States out of the 2015 Paris climate accord. He also announced steps to promote Alaskan oil and gas development and reverse outgoing President Joe Biden’s policies to protect Arctic lands and US coastal waters from drilling and encourage the adoption of electric vehicles. .
Climate scientists, as well as other environmental and energy policy experts, say Trump’s emergency does not actually exist. They stress that the president’s desire to increase fossil fuel use is a self-defeating move, as the Earth’s temperature is already 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels, harming both the planet and the economy. will damage
“There is no national energy emergency — and certainly no emergency as President Trump has defined it,” Julie McNamara, deputy policy director for the Climate and Energy Program for Associated Scientists, told Salon. “President Trump is just doing the bidding of fossil fuel executives, trying to undermine important climate and public health protections and defunding basic projects to boost their bottom lines.”
“There is no national energy emergency — and certainly no emergency as President Trump defines it.”
“There is no energy emergency in the sense of not having enough. The United States is the world’s largest producer of oil and natural gas,” said Dr. Mark Ceres, director of the National Snow and Ice Data Center. Series said we need to transition away from hydrocarbons and fossil fuels and transition to solar, wind and nuclear and embrace energy conservation, but “Trump’s climate policy seems to ignore the threat of climate change.” History and humanity will not be kind to him.”
Energy experts have confirmed that the US already has more than enough energy and that Trump’s energy policies will have detrimental economic effects on ordinary citizens.
John P. Holdren, a Harvard University professor of environmental science and engineering who specializes in energy technology innovation, called Trump’s claim of a national energy emergency “ridiculous.”This country is producing oil and gas at the highest rate in our history. — and more than every other country.”
Want more health and science stories in your inbox? Subscribe to Salon’s weekly newsletter Lab Notes.
“The United States produces more nuclear power than any other country and is producing the most renewable energy in our history,” Holdren said. “We are more than self-sufficient in energy overall — meaning we produce more than we consume. That’s been true since 2019; the last time America was (barely) self-sufficient was in 1957.
While Trump supporters bemoan rising energy costs, Holdren pointed out that gasoline was. 9% cheaper in real dollars at the end of 2023. Compared to the last year of Trump’s first term, residential electricity is 6 percent more expensive.
“There are challenges in the U.S. energy picture, but they are primarily about the need to rapidly expand non-fossil energy to reduce greenhouse gas emissions that are contributing to increasingly catastrophic climate change. are — a now all-too-obvious problem that Trump denies,” Holdren said. “His other executive orders so far have included actions that will curtail progress on real challenges.”
Kenneth Gillingham, a professor of environmental and energy economics at Yale University, explained that while Trump’s efforts to deal with non-emergencies will initially be tied up in court, “oil companies are already looking at oil prices as high as They are digging.” The long-term implication is that Trump’s environmental deregulations will cause real-world harm to people, and that companies and investors may decide not to give money to clean energy businesses, “which reduce greenhouse gas emissions.” can slow progress in reducing Businesses that produce electric vehicles or wind energy (also Targeted by Trump. Executive orders) is likely to be adversely affected.
Gillingham added that while Trump was elected in part because Americans want him to lower prices, the president’s insistence on climate change would have the opposite economic effect and increase inflation. are For example, the Los Angeles wildfires have recently been estimated. It will cost more than 200 billion dollarsand scientists say this huge financial burden is just the beginning.
“There is a long-standing relationship between climate change and inflation that will lead to higher insurance costs and investments to make supply chains more resilient to climate shocks, which will increase prices in the long run,” Gillingham said. “I think it’s a secondary factor compared to the decisions of the Fed or other central banks. And in the short term, other inflationary factors prevail.”
Dr. Kayla Bennett, director of science policy for Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility (PEER), told Salon that there is a The unbreakable link Between the science of climate change and the economics of rising prices.
“Higher temperatures, floods and droughts – all symptoms of climate change – negatively impact food production, which helps to drive inflation,” Bennett said. “Heat waves increase energy demand, which increases inflation. Extreme weather affects the supply chain. Natural disasters (like the LA fires) increase demand for construction materials, housing, etc., which increases inflation.” There are recent peer-reviewed studies on this.
Holdren echoed these concerns, saying that “it must be clear that the damages caused by the effects of climate change – droughts, heat waves, floods, hurricanes, pest outbreaks – will affect people, property, productivity and ecosystems. More damage to tropical diseases – can only make everything more expensive than it would be otherwise.”
Dean Estey, a professor of environmental law and policy at Yale University, points to current events for evidence of the kinds of phenomena that both confirm climate change and harm the economy.
“With the fires in L.A., the two high-impact hurricanes that hit Florida last year within a month, and the flooding in the Carolinas, we’re starting to see the kinds of impacts that climate scientists predict,” Esty said. had long prophesied.” “We need to redouble our efforts, in this regard, to move towards a clean energy future – and to lead the world in building a sustainable 21st century economy.”
In turn, natural disasters such as wildfires, floods and tropical cyclones will become more common due to climate change.
“When disaster strikes, prices go up,” Esty said. “In recent years, we have seen an increasing number of supply chain disruptions as a result of disasters (windstorms, floods and fires) that can be caused by climate change. The need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions “Ignoring it will increase the speed and severity of climate change – and further increase the cost in the coming years.”
McNamara bluntly argued that Trump’s policies show a disconnect from reality.
“The joke is in the facts,” McNamara said. “President Trump is claiming an energy emergency at the same time the United States is producing record levels of fossil fuels. If President Trump was truly committed to building a clean, affordable, resilient energy system, he would be doing everything he could to support the ramp-up of clean energy solutions. Instead, from the jump it tried to knock any new wind power offline.
Read more
About this topic
