The Effects of Trump Abandoning Joint Climate Action

This leaves allies uncertain and environmentalists (and frankly me) deeply concerned about what comes next.

Historical Context of US Involvement in Global Climate Action

Before the Trump era, the U.S. often stood at the center of international climate collaboration. It played a key role in the creation of the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed the Kyoto Protocol (though never ratified it), and later emerged as a major architect of the 2015 Paris Agreement. Under President Obama, the nation pledged to cut greenhouse gas emissions and supported global financing mechanisms that helped developing countries transition toward clean energy.

American diplomats frequently led negotiations, balancing domestic interests with global obligations while the tone was one of cautious optimism with an understanding that the climate challenge was shared, and that cooperation was not charity but mutual survival.

Shift in US Climate Policies Under Trump Administrations

That cooperative spirit dimmed quickly after 2016 as within months of taking office, President Trump announced the intent to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, describing it as a bad deal for American workers. The move sent shockwaves through global climate politics as the administration also rolled back dozens of environmental regulations, from methane leak rules to automotive fuel efficiency standards, often citing economic growth as justification.

Environmental organizations warned these reversals could erase years of progress with The Union of Concerned Scientists, for instance, called the policy shifts “a retreat from science-based leadership.”

Impact of US Policy Shifts on Global Climate Action

The U.S. withdrawal has left a vacuum in international climate leadership and though other major players  such as the European Union, China, and small island nations on the frontlines of climate change are reaffirming their pledges, the absence  however of the world’s 2nd largest emitter complicates unified progress. Additionally it has created funding gaps in global climate finance initiatives, with some developing nations struggling to maintain their own commitments without U.S. partnership.

Domestic Impact of Climate Policy Changes in the US

At home, the story was mixed. Coal producers and some fossil fuel industries enjoyed brief regulatory relief, but many renewable energy sectors wind, solar, and battery storage continued to grow in spite of federal rollbacks. Many of Trumps attempts to stop wind farms which were in progress were also found to be illegal and progress was allowed.

State-level policies, particularly in California, New York, and Washington have filled much of the federal void. Corporate America, too, began charting its own sustainability paths, responding to investor and consumer demand rather than political signals.

Public opinion tilted steadily toward climate concern. Grassroots movements like the Sunrise Movement gained momentum, pressing for bold climate legislation. Meanwhile, data from the Energy Information Administration suggested that while U.S. emissions dipped during parts of the administration, the reductions were largely driven by market forces namely, cheap natural gas and renewables rather than federal policy.

International Criticism and Diplomatic Repercussions

Global reactions were swift. European leaders expressed disappointment, small island nations voiced alarm, and climate diplomats privately lamented the setback. The U.S. often found itself isolated in international climate forums, its influence dimmed on issues ranging from carbon pricing to sustainable finance. While allies sought to maintain cooperation on trade and security, the trust deficit on environmental policy lingered.

In some cases, U.S. disengagement spurred others to act more decisively. The European Union advanced its Green Deal; China announced more ambitious emissions targets. Ironically, isolation may have accelerated climate action elsewhere, though it left the U.S. trailing in emerging green industries.

The Role of US States and Cities in Continued Climate Action

Even as federal leadership waned, many American cities and states doubled down on climate commitments. Organizations like the U.S. Climate Alliance a coalition of states representing over half the U.S. economy pledged to uphold the goals of the Paris Agreement regardless of Washington’s stance. Cities such as Boston, Seattle, and Miami pursued aggressive clean energy transitions and climate resilience planning.

Future Prospects for Climate Policies Post-Trump Administration

Looking ahead, much depends on political winds. Future administrations could rejoin and reinforce international accords, rebuild trust, and reinvest in climate technology. Federal investments in clean energy, carbon capture, and electric transport could regain lost ground, though restoring America’s credibility will take time. Policy analysts often point to bipartisan opportunities in resilience spending, energy independence, and job creation that might reunite a divided electorate around climate goals.

Here’s a brief summary of how actions by President Trump and the rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) are affecting solar and wind energy growth in the United States:

1. Impact of Trump Administration Policies on Solar & Wind just in 2nd term

Policy changes and regulatory shifts:
Since taking office in 2025, the Trump administration has pursued energy policies that favor fossil fuels and reduce federal support for renewables, including solar and wind. Actions have included rolling back climate policies and issuing executive directives that tighten eligibility for clean-energy tax credits for wind and solar projects. (Climate Action Campaign)

Industry analysts and energy experts say these moves have created uncertainty, delayed projects, and raised costs for renewable developers. Uncertainty around federal incentives has contributed to project cancellations or postponements, especially for large solar and wind installations that depend on long-term financial incentives. (Power Technology)

2. Rollback of the Inflation Reduction Act Renewable Incentives

Inflation Reduction Act context:
The IRA, passed in 2022, was the largest federal climate and clean-energy investment in U.S. history and included multi-year tax credits and incentives to dramatically accelerate solar and wind deployment and domestic clean-energy manufacturing. (US EPA)

Changes under the One Big Beautiful Bill (OBBB):
In 2025, President Trump signed the “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which phases out or accelerates the end of many IRA clean-energy tax incentives, especially for solar and wind.

Key changes include tax credits for wind energy components are set to expire earlier, and solar and wind tax credits facing a much faster phase-out schedule than under the original IRA timelines. (CGEP) These changes reduce the financial incentives that historically made new solar and wind projects economically viable.

3. Quantifying the Reductions in Solar & Wind Deployment

Analyst projections:
Independent energy analysts estimate that wind and solar installations over the 2025-2035 period could be significantly lower than they would have been under the original IRA incentives:

• Total installed capacity of wind and solar could be about 100 GW lower over that decade than projected under IRA policies. (woodmac.com)
• Under the IRA, the share of U.S. electricity from wind and solar was forecast to grow to a much higher level than under the revised policy regime. (Everon)

Expected growth impact:
Without the full suite of IRA incentives, some forecasts suggest overall renewable growth may be substantially slower, reducing the pace at which solar and wind contribute to U.S. electricity supply and climate goals. (woodmac.com)

4. Indirect Economic & Deployment Consequences

Economic ripple effects:
Cutting or phasing out federal incentives has tangible market effects with increased uncertainty leading to utilities and investors delaying or canceling projects (thereby also slowing job growth in these clean energy sectors according to the The Texas Tribune.

FAQs: How the U.S. Is Abandoning Joint Climate Action Under Trump

1) What does “abandoning joint climate action” actually mean?
It usually refers to the U.S. stepping back from coordinated international climate efforts, such as working through multilateral agreements, aligning emissions targets with allies, contributing to shared climate finance, or participating in joint initiatives on methane, deforestation, clean energy standards, and climate diplomacy.

2) Does this mean the U.S. leaves the Paris Agreement again?
“Abandoning joint action” can include formally withdrawing from agreements, but it can also happen without a formal exit by weakening targets, pausing cooperation, reducing funding, or deprioritizing climate in foreign policy and trade discussions.

3) What kinds of policies signal reduced international climate cooperation?
Common signals include: cutting international climate finance, reducing support for global methane and clean energy initiatives, weakening EPA or federal emissions rules that underpin U.S. pledges, expanding fossil fuel leasing/export policy, and minimizing U.S. participation in COP negotiations and climate partnerships.

4) Why does U.S. participation matter so much for global climate efforts?
Because the U.S. is one of the world’s largest historical and current emitters, a major funder of international initiatives, and a technology and capital hub. When the U.S. steps back, other countries may reduce ambition, delay targets, or struggle to mobilize funding and technology at scale.

5) Can states and cities in the U.S. still cooperate globally on climate?
Yes. U.S. states, cities, and corporations often continue climate commitments and international partnerships even when federal policy shifts. However, subnational action usually cannot fully replace federal diplomacy, regulatory power, and international finance.

Reference: https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2026-01-16/how-the-us-is-abandoning-joint-climate-action-under-trump