The world holds its breath while Americans elect another president or president. Elections in no other democracy have such major consequences in the world as voting in the US: from the war in Ukraine, through the Middle East to China and the Pacific. Who sits in the White House could have long-lasting and far-reaching consequences. The situation is no different when it comes to climate.
Climate was not among the main topics of the American election campaign – the economy and cost of living as well as migration remained at the top. However, even if the candidates mentioned climate issues only occasionally, both their achievements so far and their declarations give an idea of ​​what can be expected.
Kamala Harris's presidency in climate policy would likely be a continuation of the last four years, including the flagship policies of the Joe Biden administration. This is not a “green revolution”, but certainly some progress in the fight against global warming.
Donald Trump has been saying for years that climate change is a “hoax.” His second term would probably be an even stronger attack on climate policy than the first, when – let us recall – he decided to withdraw the US from the global climate agreement. However, even with all the power that the president of the United States has, the green transformation is happening through the efforts of other countries and companies. Four years of Trump won't stop it, but they can slow it down or distort it, and any slowdown means worse effects of climate change for all of us.
Hurricane Donald
In the last days before the election, many polls and forecasts showed that the result could be close (although there were also opinions that Kamala Harris managed to gain an advantage at the end of the campaign). While we wait for the results (and remember that we may have to wait up to several days for the final numbers from some states), let's take a closer look at what Trump and Harris would mean for the climate.
First of all, it must be emphasized that despite subsequent climate summits and promises, our actions are still very, very far from sufficient. Although the Paris Global Climate Agreement says we should keep warming to 1.5 degrees, and certainly below 2 degrees, we are currently on track to exceed these goals. If we sum up the current actions and policies of the world's countries, it turns out that by 2100 we will heat the Earth by more than 3 degrees. Consequences: more droughts and floods (as recently in Spain, previously in Poland), heat waves dangerous to health, as well as threat of exceeding climate tipping points.
The United States is the world's largest economy and historically the largest emitter gases greenhouses. These two reasons are enough for the decisions of the American authorities to have a huge impact on the rest of the world.
Donald Trump could impact global climate policy like a hurricane. Already in his first term, he decided to withdraw the US from the 2015 Paris Agreement (Joe Biden later reversed this decision). Now Trump could go a step further and abandon the UN Climate Convention – which is the basis of the 2015 agreement and all global climate policy. Of course, negotiations and summits would continue, but without the world's largest economy at the table, the entire process would begin to falter.
Domestically, Trump could not only allow “drill, drill, drill” for oil and gas without any restrictions, but also get rid of Biden's climate policy. There are also people in the Republican candidate's entourage who would like to get rid of even mentions of climate change in government administration and gut the agencies responsible for climate research and weather monitoring.
A Harris presidency – unlike Trump's – would bring continuity, not revolution. Joe Biden led to the adoption of the largest climate package in the country's history (IRA – Inflation Reduction Act), worth hundreds of billions dollars tax rebates and other incentives for clean energy. Vice President Harris took a tougher stance even before she took office from Biden, for example, on frackingi.e. hydraulic fracturing – an extremely environmentally destructive method of extracting oil and gas. During the presidential campaign, she avoided this topic and did not say much about climate policy in general.
Not everything is in the hands of one person
It's clear to those following climate policy that Harris is the “safe” choice – for America, the climate, and ultimately, all of us. Trump can be unpredictable at best and at worst accident destructive.
However, even his victory does not mean that the climate issue is lost. Global climate diplomacy will certainly suffer, but there are at least several reasons to believe that Trump will not completely stop the fight against climate change.
First of all, the green transformation is a global trend. The U.S. government can support or resist it, but it cannot stop it. Giant investments in electric cars, green energy sources, etc. in Europe, China and other parts of the world are something that is already happening. What's more, if the USA cut itself off from the green transformation, other countries could see it as their chance to cut out a “larger piece of the cake” in place of the Americans.
Secondly, the USA is a federal country. The president has enormous power, but many issues, such as energy and infrastructure, depend on decisions at the state and even city level. Already in Trump's first term, a climate coalition of state and local governments and businesses was formed, which declared that they remained faithful to the goals of the climate agreement – even if the entire country left it. It is worth noting that the development of green energy sometimes takes place across political divisions. Renewable energy sources are developing very strongly and in the “blue” Californiaand in heavily Republican Texas – finally business is business. Calculated also, of the funds in Biden's climate programs… much more goes to conservative constituencies.
Referring to the latter, Trump has a business, transactional approach to politics. He attacks climate issues because it influences his voters. But he also formed an alliance with Elon Musk, one of whose businesses is the production of electric cars. It cannot be ruled out that Trump would continue talking nonsense about “windmills that harm whales”, but he would not block green investments that he considered profitable.