The first year of President Donald Trump’s second term has seen a significant shift in federal climate and environmental policy. Upon returning to office, Trump declared an “energy emergency” and vowed to prioritize American energy production. He appointed cabinet members with ties to the oil industry and climate skepticism, leading to the rollback of climate initiatives and protections put in place by previous administrations.
One of the most notable changes under Trump’s leadership has been the dismantling of regulations aimed at reducing emissions and curbing pollution. He has also withdrawn the United States from the Paris Agreement and the U.N. Framework Convention on Climate Change, signaling a departure from global efforts to combat climate change. Scientific research has also been undermined, further eroding the country’s commitment to addressing environmental challenges.
Despite these setbacks, the global landscape for climate action has been moving forward. Renewable energy sources accounted for 40% of global electricity generation, with coal-fired power declining in countries like India and China. Clean energy investment surpassed fossil fuel investment by 50%, showcasing a shift towards sustainable energy practices worldwide. However, the United States has relinquished its leadership role in the fight against climate change, with long-term implications for the environment.
In the realm of electric vehicles (EVs), the U.S. saw a decline in market share due to policy changes implemented by the Trump administration. Federal support for EVs was reduced, including the elimination of consumer tax credits and lowered fuel-economy targets. This led to higher prices for American-made EVs and a shift towards hybrids and conventional vehicles. Meanwhile, the global EV industry continued to grow, with Chinese companies like BYD surpassing Tesla as the top-selling EV manufacturer.
In the renewable energy sector, the U.S. faced challenges in expanding clean energy generation due to political obstacles. Despite this, states like California and Texas continued to invest in solar, wind, and storage capacity, demonstrating the resilience of the market in the face of federal resistance. The demand for electricity continues to rise, driven by electrification efforts and the need for sustainable energy solutions.
Overall, the first year of Trump’s second term has reshaped the landscape of climate and environmental policy in the United States. While global progress in renewable energy and EV adoption continues, the country’s retreat from climate action poses challenges for the future. The decisions made in this pivotal year will have lasting implications for the environment and the economy. The United States saw a 3.1 percent increase in electricity demand last year, as reported by the energy think tank Ember. This surge in demand was largely met by a 27 percent rise in solar generation, which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the additional energy needed. In response to this growing demand for renewable energy sources, utilities across the country have been investing in large-scale battery storage systems to store excess energy for times when solar power is not available. For example, California saw a 70 percent increase in storage capacity in 2024 compared to the previous year.
While the impact of the Trump administration on the energy transition remains uncertain, it is evident that market forces continue to drive states towards a cleaner grid. States that prioritize renewable energy sources understand that a cleaner grid is not only environmentally beneficial but also economically advantageous and enhances grid reliability.
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) has also been playing a crucial role in helping communities prepare for future disasters. In recent years, FEMA has allocated billions of dollars to support hazard mitigation projects aimed at reducing the impact of floods, storms, and other climate-related threats. However, under the Trump administration, FEMA’s funding and approval process for resilience projects have been significantly hindered, leading to delays and backlogs in payments for critical projects.
On the enforcement front, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the Department of Justice have faced challenges in holding polluters accountable due to budget cuts and layoffs under the Trump administration. The number of enforcement cases and consent decrees have declined, weakening the government’s ability to enforce environmental laws and ensure compliance with regulations.
In terms of public lands management, the Trump administration has prioritized expanding fossil fuel development on federal lands, targeting millions of acres previously designated for conservation and recreation. This shift in land management has raised concerns about the preservation of sensitive ecosystems and habitats, as well as the potential impact on wildlife and natural resources.
Overall, the energy and environmental landscape in the United States is evolving, with a mix of progress and challenges in the transition towards cleaner, more sustainable practices. The decisions and policies enacted by the government will continue to shape the future of energy generation, environmental protection, and public land management in the country. The recent moves to terminate or rescind $1.25 billion in programs in 2025 have put ecosystems, wildlife, cultural sites, and communities at risk. This transformation of once-preserved land into resources to be exploited by industry has raised concerns among environmentalists and activists.
Juanpablo Ramirez-Franco, a Midwest regional climate reporter, highlighted the impact of these funding cuts on tribal nations. The Inflation Reduction Act initially allocated $2 billion to support clean energy and climate resilience projects for tribal communities. However, the Trump administration’s decision to slash funding for these initiatives has left many tribes struggling to find alternative sources of financial support. This has not only hindered progress towards achieving energy sovereignty but has also undermined the efforts of these communities to combat climate change.
The federal grants and incentives provided crucial assistance to tribes in developing solar farms, microgrids, battery storage systems, and climate adaptation projects on their lands. For many tribal households, these projects were essential in addressing energy access issues, as they face significantly higher rates of outages and energy burdens compared to the national average. With approximately 54,000 residents on tribal lands lacking access to electricity, the need for clean energy infrastructure is critical.
The impact of these funding cuts extends beyond just the clean energy transition. They pose a threat to Indigenous sovereignty, economic opportunities, and resilience to climate change. Tribal nations are now forced to reassess their plans, seek alternative financing options, and defend projects that were years in the making. As the government withdraws its support, tribal communities are left to navigate these challenges on their own, jeopardizing their lands, self-determination, and overall well-being.
In a separate development, the trade war initiated by President Trump in 2025 had a significant impact on the agricultural sector. Farmers across the nation faced uncertainty and financial strain as tariffs on goods from China, Canada, and Mexico disrupted agricultural markets. The protectionist agenda aimed at safeguarding workers and reducing costs ended up creating a challenging environment for growers, particularly those producing commodities like soybeans.
The trade tensions led to higher expenses, fewer buyers, and an unstable labor market for farmers. China’s retaliatory measures, including a 34 percent tax on U.S. products, further exacerbated the situation. The halt in soybean purchases by China forced the country to seek alternative suppliers like Brazil and Argentina, contributing to environmental concerns related to deforestation in those regions.
Although China eventually resumed buying U.S. soybeans and a trade deal was reached, the agricultural sector continues to feel the repercussions of the trade war. President Trump’s announcement of $12 billion in bridge payments to assist farmers in recovering from financial losses was met with skepticism by agricultural trade groups, who believe it falls short of adequately compensating farmers and safeguarding their future livelihoods.
As these challenges persist, it is essential for policymakers, industry leaders, and communities to work collaboratively towards sustainable solutions that prioritize environmental protection, cultural preservation, and community well-being. The need for long-term investments in clean energy, climate resilience, and fair trade practices is more critical than ever to ensure a sustainable and equitable future for all.
