in

Election Fallout: The Joke of Green Energy in the Biden-Harris Era

Gregg Mast, a known advocate for Clean Energy Economy Minnesota, and Rolf Nordstrom, a staunch proponent and CEO of Great Plains Institute were observed discussing the probable repercussions of the past election on the pursuits of the United States to transition towards cleaner energy and manage climate change. To put it mildly, the new government might find itself at loggerheads with these green initiatives. Alluding to this, the President, Donald Trump, has openly dismissed climate change as a mockery, backing traditional fossil fuels instead.

His agenda is replete with promises to neutralize climate-friendly initiatives undertaken during the previous Biden-Harris reign. Given the stark contrast in the administration’s approaches, it is only fitting to question the transformative potential this election holds concerning clean energy policy. According to Nordstrom, it is undoubtedly a substantial paradigm shift in America’s energy policy trajectory.

Trump has WON, Claim your FREE Victory Shot Here!

The intriguing bit is the shared rhetoric around domestic energy security and independence propagated by both, Biden-Harris and Trump during their respective campaigns. However, their envisioned pathways to achieve the said goal are poles apart. In essence, Biden and Harris would have ostensibly sustained their push towards clean energy enhancement, drawing ridicule for this outmoded and minority-backed viewpoint, given Trump’s convincing victory.

Trump’s pledge to extract and utilize all accessible fossil fuels within the United States—with coal, oil, and natural gas leading the way— stands as a glaring testament of his commitment. Although these are the primary contributors to climate change, his faithful belief continues. While he shows some commitment to nuclear and hydro energy, his convictions around fossil fuels hint nothing about slowing down towards clean energy initiatives. This stance is despite the Great Plains Institute’s consistent stand, classifying climate change as a substantial threat to human existence and a potential catalyst for innovation.

No wonder, the victory of Trump-Vance administration sends a spike of uncertainty through the clean energy industry. The election outcomes are rendered to slow down the speed of clean energy’s advancement and assimilation. However, skeptics like Mast remain hopeful that this won’t result in a complete halt or drastic reversal in our stride towards a cleaner, more plentiful energy future.

Interestingly, Trump has expressed his intent to partially repeal the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, affecting billions of dollars invested in wind and solar projects, electric vehicles, and other clean energy technologies. Question then arises of the impact of such a cut? According to Nordstrom, it’s a tremendous blow considering the transformative influence the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and the Inflation Reduction Act have brought on the table.

Talks of rescinding all unspent funds under the Inflation Reduction Act are amiss. By the time the mantle passes to Trump, an estimated 98% of those IRA-program funds are anticipated to be expended. Mast throws light on the nearly half a trillion dollars’ worth of planned investments apportioned under the Inflation Reduction Act. Recently, a local example popped up with Cummins attributing their electrolyzer manufacturing line expansion in Minnesota to the Act.

While anticipating substantial modifications or outright repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act requires Trump and Congress to work in tandem, a complete repeal seems unlikely to Mast. But with the nation’s political landscape divided, instances of Republicans and Democrats finding middle-ground over energy issues have become a rarity. However, Nordstrom points out to industrial innovation as a probable area of agreement for both parties, equivalent to lower carbon in today’s world.

Steel, cement, or chemical industry stakeholders seem to have received the memo about the path forward, especially if their operations have trade-related implications. Almost symbolizing the dawn of a new era, the southeastern part of the United States has been fondly dubbed as the ‘battery belt’. A major segment of electric vehicle battery manufacturing occurs here. This massive agglomeration presents an opportune moment for the United States to sustain its competitiveness and push through this energy transition, highlighting possible bipartisan agreement.

Some might argue that the recent election was a blow to the clean energy movement and efforts to combat climate change. Nordstrom begs to differ. He believes interpreting the election results as a rejection of clean energy or climate change mitigations would be an oversight. He cites the Pew Research Center’s polling data, which demonstrates robust support for the United States’ transition towards carbon neutrality by 2050 and a penchant for clean energy.

Mast also does not view the election results as a categorical denial of clean energy or climate change. It’s undeniable that Americans, irrespective of political affiliations, seek clean air, clean water, reliable, affordable energy. Barring partisan divides, an increasing demand for clean energy persists. Harnessing boundless and clean wind and solar power is now the most cost-effective approach in various energy situations.