With just over 50 days remaining until Donald Trump takes office once again, the president-elect has been beefing up his incoming administration with nominees and appointees that can advance the Republican’s oil and gas-focused energy agenda.
With a Republican majority in the House and Senate, Trump is not expected to face many hurdles from Congress in implementing his America-first energy goals. Though, that’s not to say he won’t face trouble from within the industry itself.
Amid a flurry of agency nominations, many environmentalists and climate activists have begun to question whether renewables can thrive under a new Trump administration. Though, at the same time, some clean advocates are confident there is space for clean energy to still grow.
As Trump’s transition team has begun to draft early Day One orders for his energy plan, many questions remain as to how it may be implemented. The Washington Examiner has taken a closer look at some of these queries, breaking down what exactly Trump’s energy agenda might look like in practice.
What is expected on Day One?
Throughout his campaign, Trump vowed to take action against a number of Biden administration climate rules and laws once in office. After the inauguration, Trump is primarily expected to make good on those promises. Last week, transition spokeswoman Karoline Leavitt told Reuters, “The American people can bank on President Trump using his executive power on Day One to deliver on the promises he made to them on the campaign trail.”
These vows include reversing President Joe Biden’s pause on new liquified natural gas export approvals — likely through expediting permitting for new projects — rollbacking back electric vehicle tax credits and gas-powered vehicle emission standards, reversing pollution standards for power plants, ending federal funding for offshore wind, and ramping up domestic oil and gas production. Additionally, the president-elect is expected to approve construction of the Keystone Pipeline, despite there being no calls to restart the dug-up and halted project.
Former Trump climate adviser George David Banks previously told the Washington Examiner that while the pipeline’s developer effectively gave up the project, it should be expected in Day One orders.
“I think just from a political and legacy perspective, I don’t know how you don’t do it,” Banks said, adding that it would be “very noticeable” if it weren’t a part of the first round of energy and environmental orders issued at the start of the next Trump administration.
Does Trump have support from oil and gas?
Following Trump’s win earlier this month, major players in the oil and gas industry echoed support for the Republican and his incoming administration. Trump has long emphasized his goals to “Drill, Baby, Drill” to boost oil and gas production in the U.S., despite output hitting record highs.
This week, some oil executives threw cold water on the plans to increase drilling, with Exxon Mobil Upstream Company President Liam Mallon saying he isn’t expecting many producers to fall in line.
“We’re not going to see anybody in ‘drill, baby, drill’ mode,” Mallon said during the Energy Intelligence Forum in London, according to Reuters. Mallon said output growth would be limited by investors’ desire to maintain capital discipline. “A radical change [in production] is unlikely because the vast majority, if not everybody, is focused on the economics of what they’re doing,” he said.
Experts have warned that increasing production could depress prices below $60 per barrel. While this would ease consumers’ wallets, it would lower producers’ profits and potentially lead to production cuts once again. However, not everyone is convinced of the impact.
During a call with reporters earlier this month, American Petroleum Institute CEO and president Mike Sommers said demand for oil and gas isn’t going away.
“The question is where that supply is going to come from, and we think it’s best — the most important place that it’s going to come from is from here in the United States where we produce it safer and more responsibly than any other country in the world,” Sommers said, accusing Biden administration policies of curbing long-term production.
Will there be backlash over dropping support for wind?
The Biden administration has pushed to expand the wind power industry, but there have been eruptions due to supply chain issues. However, Trump has vocally opposed offshore wind projects, stating he would block wind projects by executive order on Day One of his presidency.
“They destroy everything, they’re horrible, the most expensive energy there is,” Trump said at a campaign rally in May. “They ruin the environment, they kill the birds, they kill the whales.”
Trump’s rhetoric against wind energy has already influenced offshore wind projects. Earlier this week, the CEO of TotalEnergies said the company plans to pause the construction of its offshore wind farm off the New York coast because the incoming Trump administration promises to slow the transition of renewable energy.
Robert Glicksman, an environmental law professor at George Washington University, said there will likely be a backlash if the Trump administration drops its support for wind energy. He noted that many states, like Texas, generate a significant amount of wind power.
Glicksman said the incoming administration may face pushback from some Republican governors and legislatures if it tries to cut the subsidies provided for wind power by legislation like the Inflation Reduction Act.
There has been talk of the Trump administration and Congress looking to repeal parts of the Inflation Reduction Act next year.
However, Cliff Vrielink, a partner at Sidley, said he does not believe the Trump administration will oppose wind or even solar power but will instead look at other energy sources to meet energy demands. He added that the incoming administration would be less likely to promote additional federal funding or support for those technologies than the Biden administration.
Can green energy thrive under a new Trump administration?
While the president-elect has touted his oil and gas agenda, clean energy advocates, nonprofit groups, lawmakers, and industry players are confident green energy can develop more under Trump.
This may not be through the same focus as the Biden administration, which prioritized renewables such as solar and wind, but instead through an all-of-the-above approach — lending support to alternatives like nuclear power and geothermal energy.
“To me, an American agenda means more of all types of energy,” Neil Auerbach, CEO and chairman of the Hudson Sustainable Group, previously told the Washington Examiner.
Senator-elect John Curtis (R-UT) has said he believes there is still room for clean technologies to grow and ensure “they play a vital role in our economic success and energy independence.”
One projected pathway for green energy under Trump is through new language and labels for clean policies under threat in the next administration. Hogan Lovells global regulatory senior counsel Mary Anne Sullivan recently told reporters she believes many Democratic-pushed green measures will resurface under framing that aligns with Trump’s America First agenda.
“We will not be talking about a clean new deal,” Sullivan said. “We will not be talking about climate change. We will be talking about Made in America energy. We will be talking about national security and energy security.”
While there may be a flurry of repeals at the start of Trump’s next presidency, Sullivan predicted many measures will reenter legislation put forth in the next Congress.
“What I really believe is that there’s going to be a lot of repeal, change, direction, noise, and maybe action, and then it may reappear with a different name or different packaging,” Sullivan said. “Make a package differently, but in the long run, I think the basic needs are going to drive — no administration benefits from an unstable electric grid. That is a disaster for anybody.”
How will international climate action be impacted?
Uncertainty surrounds what a Trump administration might mean for global climate actions. Last week, the United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP29) ended, but throughout the summit, many nations raised concerns about whether the U.S. will hold its climate commitments.
Vrielink, partner at Sidley, said he believes the incoming administration will take the “wind out of the sails” part of the global push to reduce carbon emissions. “I think you’ll have a lot of countries that will be less passionate and energized about the various initiatives that were being promoted at COP29 and other conferences.”
In his first term, Trump withdrew the U.S. from the 2015 Paris Agreement, which aimed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, and has vowed to withdraw again.
However, James Bowe, a partner at King & Spalding, said that the Trump administration will not make immediate changes on the global front on Day One, noting that withdrawing from the Paris Climate Accord is a yearlong process.
“I do not see the Trump administration’s perspective on climate change sweeping the world and taking over global thinking on the subject,” Bowe said.
“It will certainly slow nations that are on the fence from making more commitments. But I think the overall global sentiment continues to be that climate change is something that needs to be addressed,” he added.
How does Trump’s energy czar differ from leading agency roles?
Gov. Doug Burgum (R-ND) has been deemed the incoming administration’s “energy czar,” as he was picked to lead the Department of the Interior and chair the new National Energy Council.
Glicksman, a law professor at George Washington, said the title “energy czar” does not really add any authority to what he will already have as leading the DOI. Past administrations have had various environment and energy czars. For example, John Kerry was the Biden administration’s climate czar.
Burgum’s role will be key to ensuring the administration increases U.S. oil production on public lands. On X, Burgum said “deeply grateful to President @RealDonaldTrump for this amazing opportunity to serve the American people and achieve ENERGY DOMINANCE!”
But Glicksman said Burgum’s “most significant role” will be as secretary of the interior, where he has the authority to authorize oil production in areas not currently used for those purposes.
Partner at King & Spalding, Bowe said Burgum is qualified in energy policy as he comes from a state with significant federal lands and energy production. But, Bowe noted that there are some limits on what an energy czar can do because many energy agencies are entrusted with specific laws and duties.
“On the other hand, having a coordinated energy policy is not something the U.S. has done,” Bowe said. “If there is some effort to really put together a coordinated energy policy that cuts across the various sectors of the energy industry and is focused on getting all of the various horsemen to be rolling in the same direction, that could be productive.”
What type of role will the National Energy Council play?
Burgum was picked to lead the incoming administration’s new National Energy Council, which will consist of agencies and departments across the government involved in energy permitting, production, generation, distribution, regulation, and transportation.
However, the council’s role in the Trump administration is unclear. Bowe, a partner at King & Spalding, said that, in theory, the council could be directed by the energy czar.
“There are opportunities to make energy policy more consistent,” Bowe said.
“But energy policy in the United States is established under a variety of laws, some of which are entrusted to independent regulatory agencies, and that would require fundamental change and congressional legislation, which would be somewhere between unlikely and impossible, given how thin the margins are going to be.”
Meanwhile, Vrielink, a partner at Sidley, said the council could be similar to the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS), an interagency within the Secretary of the Treasury that will examine the landscape of U.S. energy policy.
What is the rumored AI czar and how will it impact energy?
This week, sources within the Trump transition team confirmed to Axios that the president-elect was considering naming an artificial intelligence czar in his next administration. Details of the position remain hazy, but the person in the role would reportedly be expected to coordinate public and private resources to keep the U.S. at the front of the AI race.
Additionally, the position would reportedly work alongside chief AI officers across federal agencies, including the newly formed Department of Government Efficiency. Among its responsibilities, the AI czar would also look to boost private investments to expand energy to support AI advancements, according to Axios.
AI has been at the forefront of the energy demand boom in recent years as Big Tech races to develop its AI technologies. As a result, many tech companies have moved to increase the number of data centers that can process and store information for their AI systems.
Large-load facilities like data centers are notorious for using massive amounts of energy without putting anything back into the grid.
“On the energy side, [AI] plays in a big way,” Frank Maisano, a senior principal at energy law firm Bracewell, told the Washington Examiner. “This is a huge priority, this is a huge challenge. This affects everybody from consumers and businesses all the way up to the grid operators who manage the reliability, to the utilities who provide the power.”
While the AI czar may not hold as much power as agency heads like the Environmental Protection Agency administrator or Department of Energy secretary, the czar will still have a seat at the table. Given the impact AI has on energy demand, it would not come as a surprise if the rumored energy czar were also made a member of Trump’s National Energy Council.
Is permitting reform expected to succeed under a Republican trifecta?
Sens. Joe Manchin and John Barrasso’s Energy Permitting Reform Act of 2024 is expected to be taken up in Congress’s lame duck session. Still, many believe the likelihood of the legislation passing is slim to none due to limited time.
However, Republican lawmakers have indicated that if Congress cannot strike a deal on permitting reform, the GOP will consider pushing its own bill next year.
Glicksman said there is a “good chance” permitting will succeed next year with the GOP controlling Congress and the White House. Still, Democrats have a strong incentive to pass permitting legislation during the lame duck session because provisions on clean energy are less likely to be part of the bill next year.
In addition, Vrielink, a partner at Sidley, said, “There is widespread support for improving the foreseeability, predictability, efficiency, and timeline in order to build the infrastructure we need.”
What will Republicans slash from the Inflation Reduction Act?
For months, Trump and the Republican Party have vowed to deliver massive rollbacks to the Democratic-passed Inflation Reduction Act, which expanded investments for clean energy projects, tax credits, and more. However, as much of that funding has gone toward projects and jobs in Republican-led regions, many in the GOP have begun to change their tune.
In a major sign of support for parts of the IRA, House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) indicated in September that the next Congress would comb through the law with a “scalpel” rather than a “sledgehammer” in order to save some provisions.
Curtis echoed that thinking last week, telling industry players and reporters during a breakfast hosted by C3 Solutions at the Capitol Hill Club that supporters of the IRA should not be afraid of a massive repeal.
“We will use a surgical approach to this,” the incoming Sen. said. “I think even our Democratic colleagues should be comfortable with the surgical approach. They spent $1.57 trillion in a very short period of time. Could they have gotten some things wrong? Of course, and so we ought to be receptive to refinement.”
Curtis, like Johnson and their Republican colleagues, has declined to detail what provisions they specifically would like to see untouched or thoroughly reviewed.
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
However, Curtis said Republicans will likely approach the expected rollbacks by assessing whether the funding secured in the IRA is providing the intended outcome for various measures, such as reducing carbon. He went on to say that repeal discussions must also account for the effects on the market, given the amount of capital invested within the energy sector since the law was passed in 2022.
“Nothing’s wrong with fine-tuning, right?” Curtis said. “We owe it to the American people to fine-tune, to look at the results of what’s happening and for certain areas that could be improved. Let’s have that conversation.”