Will Trump’s election slow the shift to clean energy? Two policy experts weigh in
Go Deeper.
Create an account or log in to save stories.
Like this?
Thanks for liking this story! We have added it to a list of your favorite stories.
Last week’s election could have major impacts on U.S. efforts to shift to cleaner energy and curb climate change.
President-elect Donald Trump has called climate change a hoax, and pledged support for fossil fuels. He’s also promised to roll back many of the climate initiatives launched under the Biden-Harris administration.
MPR News spoke with the Rolf Nordstrom, president and CEO of the nonpartisan nonprofit Great Plains Institute, and Gregg Mast, executive director of Clean Energy Economy Minnesota, an industry-led nonprofit, about what it will mean for the energy transition already underway. The interview was edited for length.
How much of a game changer is this election in terms of clean energy policy?
Nordstrom: In terms of overall vision for American energy policy, it’s a pretty seismic shift. What’s interesting to me is both presidential candidates during the campaign talked about domestic energy security and independence.
Turn Up Your Support
MPR News helps you turn down the noise and build shared understanding. Turn up your support for this public resource and keep trusted journalism accessible to all.
But they had very different visions of what that looks like on the ground. I think it’s safe to say Harris would have likely continued to prioritize policies that accelerate the scale-up of clean energy as part of America’s economic and industrial policy.
Trump has been pretty full-throated in his commitment to exploit all fossil fuels available to the United States. That’s coal and oil and natural gas, which, of course, are the primary sources of climate-altering emissions. He’s also expressed support for nuclear and hydro. But I think his support for fossil fuels does not in any way mean that we won’t see more clean energy too.
The Great Plains Institute has always viewed climate change as simultaneously a real threat to human well-being, and also maybe the greatest opportunity for innovation and reinvention since the first Industrial Revolution. And I don’t think that’s hyperbole. You can see that in terms of what the markets continue to do on clean energy.
Mast: There is no doubt the incoming Trump-Vance administration will present some of the old as well as some new challenges to the clean energy industry. This has certainly been evidenced on the campaign trail and the use of the “Drill, baby, drill” slogan by President-elect Trump, just as one example.
The election results are certainly going to impact and likely slow the pace of clean energy development and deployment ... I am, however, hopeful that it may not and doesn’t need to necessarily result in the complete slam the brakes and total U-turn moment on our journey towards a cleaner and more abundant energy feature for our country and our state.
President-elect Trump has promised to at least partially repeal the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which included billions of dollars for wind and solar projects, electric vehicles and other clean energy technology. What impact would that have?
Nordstrom: It’s hard to overstate how big an impact both the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act have had. I think it's really been transformative.
Trump has said that he would rescind all unspent funds under the Inflation Reduction Act. But my understanding is that 98 percent of those IRA programs are projected to be spent down by January. Much of the IRA investment — in fact, more than half of the investments in those clean energy projects — have gone to congressional districts represented by Republicans.
I just think it’ll be too simplistic to say that it’s all going to be rolled back. I don’t personally expect that to happen, but I also don’t think we’re likely to see a new tranche of investment in the same way under a Trump administration.
Mast: There’s been nearly a half a trillion dollars in planned investment, more or less due to the Inflation Reduction Act. And those projects and those investments are predominantly flowing, the large majority, to Republican congressional districts. There’s over 200-some projects that have been announced, and those projects are projected to deliver over $100 billion in economic development, as well as tens of thousands of jobs.
Here in Minnesota, we have seen Cummins, who hosted President Biden at their facility in Fridley when they announced the expansion of their electrolyzer manufacturing line, because of the Inflation Reduction Act. That is a local example of a company that is expanding investment, adding jobs, to be a part of the clean energy economy.
We also know that Heliene in the northern part of Minnesota in Mountain Iron, because of manufacturing tax credits from the Inflation Reduction Act, are expanding capacity and manufacturing capacity for producing solar panels. They’ve announced a new location in Rogers as well for that manufacturing capacity and expansion. So we’re seeing benefits locally of the Inflation Reduction Act.
While it will take President-elect Trump working with Congress to significantly alter or repeal the Inflation Reduction Act, I don’t think that's entirely likely for a complete repeal.
Are there areas where Republicans and Democrats could work together on issues or find common ground on energy issues?
Nordstrom: One is around industrial innovation, which, in today’s context, almost by definition, also means lower carbon. If you talk to people in the steel industry or cement or chemicals, I think everybody has gotten the memo that this is where the world is going, especially if you’re a trade-exposed company or industry.
Really extreme weather is becoming much more common and incredibly costly. The U.S. broke records for billion-dollar disasters in in 2023. So I think that strengthening the electric grid and enhancing its reliability — not only to make sure that the lights stay on, but to make sure that when the weather is bad that we have a grid that is well enough connected from region to region across the country. That states can, in effect, sort of borrow a cup of sugar from their neighbors when they need extra power.
It might seem kind of fanciful, given President Trump’s at least past antipathy towards electric vehicles, but I actually think that it’s possible that EV infrastructure might still be a place where where the parties could come together. If you look at the just the sheer investment that the U.S. auto industry has made in electric vehicles of various kinds, that feels like an investment that is very sticky.
Mast: What we have seen, certainly in the southeast part of the United States, is what’s now being referred to as the battery belt. That is where a lot of the electric vehicle battery manufacturing is taking place, with big investments and manufacturing facilities being announced. When you look at the political map, that is very much right in the heart of Republican congressional districts.
The United States has a real opportunity to ensure that we remain competitive, that we move forward and continue to push in these areas, because it is going to benefit our manufacturing. It’s improving national security. It also gets to energy independence, and I think that that is an area of bipartisan agreement.
Was this election a rejection of the clean energy movement and efforts to address climate change?
Nordstrom: I don’t think people should read into this election the rejection of clean energy or efforts to address climate change. The most recent polling from the Pew Research Center suggests that more than two-thirds of Americans support the U.S. taking steps to become carbon neutral by 2050, and there’s enormous support for clean energy as well.
And while it differs some by party affiliation, even majorities of Republicans really like clean energy. There’s a lot of market momentum there. I think elections, in some ways, are sort of blunt instruments.
Mast: I don’t see the results of the election as an all-out rejection of clean energy or of climate change. We know that Americans (on) both sides of the political aisle, we all value clean air, clean water. We want to ensure that our energy is reliable, that it’s affordable. And certainly the demand is there that increasingly is going to be clean.
When we think about inflation or just the everyday costs that Americans are dealing with, clean energy is one solution to combat that, certainly in the near, medium, long term. The sun and wind are free and clean. Energy is currently the lowest cost option in many, many scenarios when it comes to energy.