Re-elected Commission president Ursula von der Leyen and Donald Trump in Davos 2020. Photo: European Union.
While Europeans expect a continuation of the Biden administration’s climate policies under a Harris presidency, they are worrying about how to save the global climate fight from a second Trump administration. EU officials and experts fear that a U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement could be much more damaging than during his first presidency, because it could be implemented without delay, and be actively designed to harm international climate diplomacy.
As U.S. election day approaches and the polls remain in a dead heat, European climate activists and politicians are preparing for the worst.
“The looming menace of a Trump two administration could cast a wide shadow in international climate politics,” worries Lola Vallejo, a climate special advisor with the think tank IDDRI.
Europe may have been able to hold global climate efforts together during Trump’s first term after he took the U.S. out of the 2015 Paris Agreement. But the fear is that without the same guardrails that existed back then, it would be much more difficult for the European Union to preserve global climate efforts this time around – especially with climate action momentum already fading in Europe.
“Back when that happened last time, the system was resilient and no other large country left the agreement,” says Vallejo, who has been co-chairing the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) Sharm el-Sheikh mitigation work programme since last year. “But I think this time it could be more severe because he’s vowed to also leave the whole [UNFCCC] convention. And this time there would not be any delay, whereas last time there was a three-year delay, which allowed some breathing time for U.S. diplomats.”
One EU official, who was formerly involved with COP negotiations during the Trump years and who preferred to remain anonymous because of the diplomatic sensitivity, said the EU’s response will need to be more assertive than it was last time, when some American officials were constructive even after the U.S. gave notice to leave. “I have the feeling that now there may be an effort to actively undermine the agreement, which we didn’t see last time. The EU will have to fight against that.”
Europe can and must become the guardian of the Paris Agreement.
- Mohammed Chahim, MEP
Asked whether the European Commission is preparing for the possibility of Trump taking the U.S. out of the Paris Agreement again, climate spokesman Tim McPhie said, “the Commission will work constructively with the future U.S. administration, as it always has done.” But he added that, “As always, we will be working hard at COP29 and beyond to ensure that all the parties to the Paris Agreement do the same.”
The big question is whether Europe can again fill the gap left behind in the international climate arena if Trump returns to power, given the changed circumstances of 2024 versus 2016. While climate change ranked as an important motivator in voter surveys ahead of the EU election in 2019, with 77 percent considering it an important issue, it was not a top priority for voters in 2024 with only half of them calling it an important issue.
European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen has been backing away from her own Green Deal, under pressure from her centre-right European People’s Party (EPP) group. She has now been rebranding it as the “clean, just and competitive transition.” The EPP, along with the further-right ECR group, has been complaining that some Green Deal measures adopted during von der Leyen’s first term are inhibiting economic growth and putting European companies at a competitive disadvantage with their global counterparts.
“Europe can and must become the guardian of the Paris Agreement” if the U.S. withdraws again, says centre-left Dutch MEP Mohammed Chahim, vice-chair of the European Parliament’s delegation to the COP 28 UN climate summit in Dubai, who has long been involved in the EU’s international climate negotiations. “We cannot in any way lessen our ambition, and the EU will need to take an even more leading role in achieving ambitious climate legislation worldwide.”
Largely symbolic first exit
Trump first promised to take the U.S. out of the global climate framework during his presidential campaign in 2016, calling it a “bad deal” that imposed unfair economic burdens on his country leading to job losses and reduced economic growth. He said that the agreement would disadvantage American workers and industries compared to other countries.
But it wasn’t until June 2017 that he announced the withdrawal. That’s because, for the first six months of his presidency, there was a debate within the administration where several people, reportedly including Trump’s daughter Ivanka, were trying to talk him out of it. Even after the announcement, the actual withdrawal was slow-walked by those around Trump and the State Department. Because of the rules of the treaty, actual withdrawal could not happen until November 2019. In the meantime, there was a ‘shadow’ U.S. delegation at the yearly COPs that seemed to be continuing engagement with the Paris Agreement despite Trump’s decree.
“We learned that the decision to withdraw from the Paris Agreement was more symbolic for Trump than a genuine strategic policy move,” says Chahim. “Despite the withdrawal, American NGOs, mayors, senators and House members continued to participate in the COPs.”
Trump announced his decision to pull out of the Paris Agreement a few months before the 2017 UN climate change conference in Bonn, Germany. Photo: CLEW/Wettengel.
Centre-right German MEP and chair of the European Parliament’s COP 28 delegation Peter Liese agrees. “I was positively surprised already at the COP in 2017 in Bonn” with continued engagement from U.S. states and companies. “On the other hand, it is a challenge,” he says. “Even the commitments of the United States now are not really in line with the Paris targets. We need to have a strong answer, for example, a very strict implementation of the Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) when it comes to the U.S.”
A second U.S. withdrawal from the Paris Agreement would be a horrible sign for third countries that are committing to make emissions cuts with the confidence that highly emitting countries are doing the same.
- Peter Liese, MEP
This time around, with plans to purge the civil service of anyone who is not sufficiently loyal to Trump, climate activists and politicians are concerned that there would be no pro-climate action voices left in the administration or the State Department. With a second Trump term expected to be more radical and unrestrained than the first, the expectation is that the withdrawal would be total. And the Trump campaign has made it clear that a second withdrawal would come almost immediately after he is sworn in.
Liese warns a second U.S. withdrawal could undermine emission-cutting efforts across the globe. “This would be a horrible sign for third countries that are committing to make emissions cuts with the confidence that highly emitting countries are doing the same.”
Keeping Paris afloat
During the first Trump term, the EU was able to hold the Paris Agreement together by striking an alliance with most-impacted developing countries to put pressure on China, India and Brazil. The continued presence of an unofficial U.S. State Department delegation at the COPs until 2019 was also helpful, as was the “We Are Still In” coalition formed by U.S. state governments and businesses that set up their own delegation at the COPs.
Holding the Paris Agreement together during a Trump second term will depend on European leadership and Chinese cooperation. Activists say it will be crucial for the EU’s new climate chiefs to be tough with both Washington and Beijing. Despite her seeming to back away from her Green Deal ahead of the EU election in June, climate activists have been heartened by von der Leyen appointing three high-profile commissioners last month to work on the issue in her second term – Teresa Ribera as executive vice president, Wopke Hoekstra as climate commissioner and Dan Jørgensen as energy commissioner.
“In case of a second Trump administration, the three would be well-placed to navigate new tariffs, trade threats and tensions, without being naive on China,” says Linda Kalcher, executive director of the think tank Strategic Perspectives. “As strong advocates for moving to a fossil-free energy system, it will be on them to lower LNG imports from the U.S.”
Wopke Hoekstra and Spain's Teresa Ribera speak to the media at the UN Climate Change Conference COP28. Photo: UN Climate Change / Mahmoud Khaled.
Companies set to continue climate efforts
For their part, businesses on both sides of the Atlantic are insisting that their climate efforts will continue no matter who becomes the next U.S. president, just like they did the last time.
“Globally, regions are investing in clean technologies whether or not a new U.S. administration decides to pull out of the Paris Agreement,” says Ursula Woodburn, director of the Corporate Leaders Group Europe, which brings together climate-ambitious businesses. “Leading European businesses understand the critical importance of investing in the decarbonisation of their products, services and value chains […] and we know our counterparts in the U.S. are on the same page.” She points out that even after Biden took office and returned the U.S. to the Paris Agreement, the We Are Still In coalition remained, but renamed itself America is All In.
Kamala continuity
Climate stakeholders generally do not have a lot to say when it comes to their expectations for a Kamala Harris presidency, because they are expecting continuity from the Biden administration’s climate policy. Chahim says he expects a “continuation” of Biden’s policies, “aligning closely with our European ambitions for sustainability.”
Stakeholders expect continued implementation of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) which, while disliked for its perceived protectionist subsidy policies, was welcomed by the EU as the first American legislation to follow Europe’s efforts to combat climate change.
The EU has the most comprehensive climate change-fighting legislative framework of any major economy in the world, and for years European politicians have complained that the EU is handicapping itself by taking action when nobody else was. They were particularly angry in 2008, when the EU adopted the main phase of their Emissions Trading System (ETS) with the expectation that the U.S. would follow suit, because both Barack Obama and John McCain supported carbon pricing in their presidential campaigns.
However, Europeans were left disappointed when the Obama administration did not prioritise climate legislation and abandoned their attempt to establish carbon pricing in America after Obama’s climate bill was defeated by Republicans in 2010. Another attempt at major U.S. climate legislation was not made until the IRA in 2022, and the Biden administration spent major political capital getting it passed in the face of Republican opposition.
Harris is expected to continue to move IRA implementation forward as part of her broader commitment to climate change policies. She supports moving forward with voluntary carbon markets in America. While European climate activists were left disappointed by Obama-Biden, they were hopeful of Biden-Harris. And with real climate legislation now in place, prospects for new EU-U.S. partnerships under Harris-Walz look more promising than they have ever been.
“[Harris] will for sure re-affirm the U.S. commitment to the Paris Agreement, and take on a leading role at the future COPs,” says Chahim. “In 2022, we welcomed the Inflation Reduction Act, a legislation that represents a historic investment in clean energy and climate initiatives. I expect Harris to push for additional tax credits and incentives aimed at accelerating the adoption of renewable energy technologies and electric vehicles, making them accessible to a broader range of people.”
Environment, social and governmental (ESG) investors in Europe are bullish about the economic opportunities that would arise from a Harris presidency.
“This support for the climate agenda presents significant opportunities for investors in the renewable energy sector with a Democrat presidency,” says Tara Irwin, a senior ESG analyst with the firm Hargreaves Lansdown. “With Harris and Trump presenting starkly different approaches to ESG-related issues, the election results could significantly influence the future of responsible investing.”
House and Senate races also key
But whether Harris can get further climate legislation passed will depend on the results of the U.S. House and Senate races across the country on 5 November. Democrats could hold the presidency but lose Congress, leaving no chance of passing any further climate legislation in the coming years.
So, European businesses are keenly watching the whole election result, not just the race for president.
"If the EU is looking for Kamala Harris to prove a substantive ally on climate, the races in the Senate and House are also worth following,” says Woodburn. “Majorities there would allow Harris to work on new climate policies, rather than needing to rely on the Inflation Reduction Act."
A second Trump term, by contrast, is expected to dampen enthusiasm for climate investments. “Trump has consistently championed the fossil fuel industry, advocating for deregulation to boost oil, gas and coal production,” says Irwin. “From 2016 to 2020, during Trump’s presidency, U.S. crude oil production increased by approximately 30 percent. With regard to offshore wind, he has vowed to immediately halt and scrap projects on ‘day one’. His stance on fossil fuels has raised concerns about the potential impacts on climate and the associated risks to businesses, supply chains and communities.”
Huge distraction from climate
In the end, one of the biggest concerns for climate policy could be simple distraction. If Trump comes back to power, it could spark a period of great uncertainty stretching far beyond the climate realm - from the war in Ukraine to domestic repression in the United States. The biggest risk may be that such an intense geopolitical period would see climate fall to the wayside, as politicians grapple with new challenges.
- This article was originally published on Clean Energy Wire under the Creative Commons BY NC ND licence. Read the original article.
