Project 2025 Takes Nation Down A Dark Eco Path, Says Energy Innovation

The United States is leading global efforts to combat climate change by crafting policies to prioritize investment in sustainable energy and technologies. However, Project 2025 would roll back climate legislation and favor the traditional American economy based on fossil fuels.

According to Energy Innovation’s August 2024 study, implementing those outdated policies would cause job losses, increased pollution, and higher energy costs. Thus, the United States is facing a critical decision. What now? Continuing on the current trajectory will enable us to meet our obligations under the Paris Agreement, resulting in a 57% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030 compared to 2005.

Project 2025 represents a departure from our current policies. Instead of promoting clean fuels, the plan would encourage oil and coal extraction. This shift would significantly impact the nation’s gross domestic product, with a projected decrease of hundreds of billions of dollars over the next 25 years. As a result, there would be fewer jobs and a notable increase in greenhouse gas emissions—specifically, an estimated 76 billion tons more, according to Energy Innovation.

“Future policy changes could build upon America’s success to date, further cutting emissions, adding millions of jobs to the economy, and improving public health,” said Energy Innovation. “Or they could undo this progress, jeopardizing U.S. climate targets, adding billions in energy costs to American households, costing the U.S. economy millions of jobs and billions in GDP, and increasing pollution-driven early deaths.”

While the Republican presidential nominee, Donald Trump, denies knowledge of Project 2025, the facts suggest otherwise. His vice presidential pick authored the document’s intro, while his former staff penned most of the chapters. Moreover, he calls climate change a “hoax” and quipped during a campaign stop in North Carolina that no one knows what net zero means.

To that end, Project 2025 portrays the Environmental Protection Agency as ideologically driven and an agency that must be curtailed at all costs. That would come at the expense of clean air and clean water.

The Crossroad Ahead

Nobody wants to return to the days when rivers caught fire because of the lack of regulation or massive oil spills off the Pacific Coast. These incidents occurred before President Nixon created the Environmental Protection Agency in 1970. Republicans led the charge in those days. However, today, many in the party view environmentalism as a dirty word.

The 2025 platform also endorses the return of coal and advocates for more oil production, discounting the United States’s current position as the world’s top oil producer. Moreover, the U.S. Energy Information Administration predicts that renewable energy will comprise 44% of the electricity portfolio by 2050.

“People can deny climate change all they want, but it’s still real and a top priority for many businesses, including the insurance industry and the Pentagon, which have worked climate into their prediction models. Moreover, addressing climate issues is good for business,” Ndustrial Chief Executive Jason Massey told me.

In the meantime, Project 2025 calls for deep cuts in federal funding for climate research and the withdrawal from the Paris Agreement. However, dismissing climate change can have significant economic implications, leading to more frequent and harsher natural disasters. Moreover, the globe’s most cutting-edge industries are now investing in sustainable fuels and modern technologies: Amazon, Apple, and Microsoft, to name three.

Climate change denial is mainly a political phenomenon driven by think tanks and ambitious politicians looking to advance economic interests—typically bankrolled by the affected industries and companies. It’s one thing to be skeptical of government overreach and excessive regulation, but it’s another to deny scientific evidence. ExxonMobil has reversed its stance on this issue and is now broadening its investments to include 21st-century technologies.

Offsetting Fossil Fuel Emissions

The objective is to attract the financial and intellectual assets to move ahead. This creates new opportunities in manufacturing, while also mitigating the threat of global warming. According to Energy Innovation, this is a crucial rationale behind enacting the Inflation Reduction Act, Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, and CHIPS and Science Act —measures that have spurred more than $500 billion in private investments during Joe Biden’s presidency.

“There is an absolute connection between policy and the pace at which new technologies reach the market,” says Fourth Power’s Chief Executive Arvin Ganesan during a recent symposium.

Greenhouse gas emissions are unavoidable for now but must be balanced with removals to achieve net zero. To attain such neutrality, the international climate pact aims to triple the use of renewables, double energy efficiency measures, and stop deforestation, all by 2030—intended to offset fossil fuel usage. That will keep temperatures in check and mitigate droughts, floods, and food and water shortages.

Carbon Brief generally concurs with Energy Innovation’s findings. Carbon Brief concludes that carbon emissions would increase by 4 billion tons under a second Trump Administration by 2030 compared to the Biden Administration. That increase is the equivalent of the combined output of Japan and the European Union, resulting in $900 billion in climate damage.

No matter how you view it, that’s not economic and environmental progress.

This autumn, the American public will decide whether to elect candidates dedicated to embracing the green energy economy or those tied to the traditional industrial age that made the United States a global powerhouse. However, times and technologies have progressed, posing a threat to some enterprises. In response, they are using sophisticated marketing campaigns to support outdated ideas—ones that could smother the sustainable era that is producing positive results.