The Summary
- Two of President Donald Trump s executive orders take aim at Biden administration efforts to boost electric vehicles and wind power.
- Both are among the fastest-growing climate technologies in the U.S., but the orders could stymie that growth.
- Advocates for electric vehicles and green energy criticized the moves.
President Donald Trump on Monday altered the course of two of the fastest-growing climate-friendly technologies in the United States—wind power and electric vehicles—with two executive orders.
The directives targeted the Biden administration’s initiatives to advance these technologies, which have gained popularity in the recent years as part of the movement to decarbonize the US energy market. Trump also announced that the United States would withdraw from the Paris Agreement, which sets targets for countries to reduce carbon emissions in order to slow global warming.
A number of climate-related directives, including tailpipe emissions restrictions intended to promote the use of electric vehicles, were overturned by one of Trump’s executive orders. During his campaign, Trump claimed that the rule required customers to purchase pricey electric vehicles and promised to repeal it, referring to it as then-President Joe Biden’s EV mandate.
The action was condemned by proponents of electric vehicles, who pointed out that it would make the United States less competitive in the global auto industry.
Max Boykoff, director of the Center for Science and Technology Policy Research at the University of Colorado Boulder, stated that when we do such things, we suffer, we miss out, and we waste possibilities. Because then other countries will be able to fill that void. Indeed, Chinese businesses are already surpassing the U.S. market for electric vehicles, and they are prepared to do even better.
An inquiry was not answered by the Trump administration.
The second order prohibited federal agencies from giving new permits or financing for onshore or offshore wind projects, and it temporarily stopped federal approvals for lease sales of offshore wind projects in federal waters. In the order, Trump made erroneous claims that wind turbines could cause serious harm by putting marine life, including whales, in danger and implied that wind power raises energy costs. The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration states that there are no known connections between offshore wind turbines and massive whale deaths.
Members of the wind power community also resisted the order. Blocking wind power goes against Trump’s larger objective of unleashing American energy, according to Jason Grumet, CEO of the American Clean Power Association, a trade group for clean energy producers.
Grumet said in a statement that the Administration’s energy-focused Executive Orders are in stark contrast to one another. On the one hand, the orders aim to reduce bureaucracy and unleash energy production, but on the other, they increase bureaucratic barriers, undermining domestic energy development and harming American businesses and workers.
Trump’s directives coincide with a recent surge in the use of wind and electric cars.
According to an S&P Global estimate, by 2030, more than one in four new passenger cars sold worldwide will be electric. Last year, electric and hybrid vehicle purchases accounted for a record 20% of new car sales in the United States, according to CNBC. The International Energy Agency reports that sales of electric cars have increased sixfold since 2018.
The U.S. Energy Information Administration projected in 2023 that by 2050, wind and solar energy would account for the majority of the country’s new energy capacity. In the United States, offshore wind power produced more electricity than coal in March and April. However, the consulting firm McKinsey claims that the growth of wind power has been threatened by a number of macroeconomic phenomena, including growing commodity prices and supply chain problems.
Trump has long targeted wind energy, particularly huge turbines. Although the majority of recorded whale deaths were ascribed to vessel strikes and entanglement in fishing gear, he has frequently blamed offshore wind projects for an increase in whale deaths around the Atlantic coast. Trump has repeatedly claimed that wind turbines harm birds and that their noise might cause cancer, even though there is no proof of a connection. That last assertion is true, however some studies indicate that electricity lines and building strikes are more likely to kill birds.
According to climate organizations like the Sierra Club and the Environmental Defense Fund, the changes outlined in Trump’s executive orders pose a threat to the expansion of green jobs, particularly in conservative states like Georgia.
Referring to the executive order on electric vehicles, Zara Ahmed, vice president of policy and advisory operations at Carbon Direct, a carbon management company, said it’s a short-term political decision that could have long-term economic repercussions.
Ahmed went on to say that the clean tech shift would unavoidably proceed despite Trump’s rules.
Trump attempted to restrict some states’ authority to establish their own requirements for the adoption of electric vehicles in yet another executive order that was released on Monday.
The order focuses on a federal waiver that California received under the Biden administration, allowing the state to impose stricter tailpipe emission regulations than those set by the federal government. By 2032, California would effectively ban new gasoline-powered vehicles from the state’s highways. The California standard has been adopted by nine states, including Washington and New York.
Former Environmental Protection Agency lawyer Paul Cort, who currently works for the environmental charity Earthjustice, stated that he does not think Trump’s order would withstand legal challenges and that he expects it to be challenged in court.
California’s laws cover more ground than merely climate change. According to Cort, these regulations were made to help California, which has pollution problems, satisfy its smog and air quality requirements. What legal basis do they have for claiming that California is unable to clean its automobiles?