“Drill, Baby, Drill”: Trump Officially Withdraws the U.S. from the Paris Agreement

As the planet experiences unprecedented temperature records and suffers from increasingly intense climatic disasters, political actions in the fight against global warming are becoming increasingly important. Among them, the Paris agreement, signed in 2015 by 196 countries, represents a pillar of international efforts to limit the rise in temperatures to 1.5 ° C above pre-industrial levels. But Donald Trump does not see it that way. eye.

And unfortunately, the decisions of great powers like the United States, the world's second largest emitter of greenhouse gases, directly influence the effectiveness of this agreement. The recent withdrawal of the United States, made official by Trump upon his return to the presidency, revives concerns about the future of international cooperation in the face of the climate crisis. This choice, with global repercussions, raises crucial questions about the management of this global emergency.

A break marked by a flashback

Donald Trump chose to mark his return to the presidency in 2025 with a symbolic and controversial decision: the withdrawal of the United States from the Paris climate agreement, a measure already implemented during his first term in 2017. Trump once again denounced this commitment as a “unilateral theft”. For him, this agreement disadvantaged the American economy to the benefit of countries like China. In a speech after his swearing-in, he said that China, the world's largest emitter of greenhouse gases, “pollutes without restraint” while benefiting from international leniency. Trump justified his withdrawal by saying he would not sacrifice American industries for the sake of a deal he considers unfair.

The speed of this withdrawal, planned to be effective within one year, contrasts sharply with the initial procedure of 2017. This took three years to come to fruition due to the rules of the agreement. This acceleration is due to the absence of long-term commitments made by the Biden administration, which had rejoined the agreement in 2021. Indeed, the reaccession process did not impose new deadlines, thus allowing the new government to act quickly to reverse federal climate policy. Once signed into law, the United States will join Iran, Libya and Yemen as the only countries outside the global agreement.

A “national energy emergency” declared

Donald Trump, in a spectacular gesture upon his return to the presidency, proclaimed a “national energy emergency”. This measure is intended to radically transform United States energy policy. Under this pretext, he announced a set of decisions aimed at strengthening the exploitation of fossil fuels, which he considers to be the key to American economic prosperity. These measures include in particular the end of renewable and clean energy development projects, which he describes as “ new green scam “. He will also suspend environmental regulations introduced under the Biden administration, in particular those aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions from vehicles.

Specifically, Donald Trump announced his intention to revoke an “electric vehicle (EV) mandate,” saying the move would protect the U.S. auto industry. However, this “mandate” does not exist. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has only introduced emissions rules that encourage between 35% and 56% of new car sales to be EVs by 2032. Nothing prevents Americans to buy gasoline vehicles, which remain the majority (92% of sales in 2024).

Tesla CEO and Trump supporter Elon Musk supports ending tax credits for EV purchases. This removal could benefit Tesla by making its vehicles more competitive with other manufacturers, but it could also slow the overall adoption of EVs by reducing financial incentives for consumers.

“Drill, baby, drill” or not…

Furthermore, Trump promised “to boost oil and gas production, already at record levels, with 12.8 million barrels per day in 2023. He wants to increase the American presence in global energy markets. “ We will be a wealthy nation again, and it is this liquid gold beneath our feet that will help us get there “, he said Monday.

But experts doubt the effectiveness of Donald Trump's promises. Bringing gasoline prices below $2 a gallon through increased oil production, as he has announced, seems unrealistic, even if his measures pass the legal filter. Bob McNally, former energy adviser to George W. Bush, points out CNN that American oil production, unlike the OPEC countries, is governed by the free market, and not by government decisions. This autonomy limits the direct impact of federal policies on prices.

© EIA

Past failures of overproduction continue to weigh on the strategies of oil companies. In 2020, the collapse of prices to $20 a barrel, caused by oversupply, left scars. Today, only 14% of oil executives plan to significantly increase their investments, according to the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, while many prefer to reduce their spending.

Growing polarization on the national scene

Donald Trump's decision to withdraw the United States from the Paris agreement has reignited fractures within American public opinion. A survey of the Associated Press shows that more than half of Americans disapprove of this choice. Only a minority firmly supports him, including Republicans. This polarization reveals growing skepticism towards a strategy perceived by many as disconnected from current climate and economic realities. The United States is therefore going against international trends.

If Trump's supporters highlight the need to protect fossil industries and guarantee energy independence, a significant part of the population, associations and businesses consider this orientation as an obstacle to the opportunities offered by clean energies, in particular in terms of jobs and global economic competitiveness. According to Simon Stiell, executive secretary of the United Nations climate negotiations, cited by the BBCclean energies, whose economic value exceeds 2,000 billion dollars annually. By neglecting clean energy, Trump could jeopardize the country's standing on the world stage.

Faced with this federal divide, many officials have stepped up efforts to maintain the country's climate commitments. More than 5,000 leaders, including mayors and governors, representing 74% of U.S. GDP, committed to pursuing the goals of the Paris Agreement. And this regardless of federal decisions. These initiatives, such as the US climate alliance, bring together leaders from various political sides and illustrate a desire for resilience in the face of national politics. These efforts, led in particular by states like California and New York, demonstrate that the fight against climate change remains a priority for a large part of the country. And will remain so despite the controversial decisions of the Trump administration.

Worrying global impacts

The United States' decision to withdraw from the Paris agreement nevertheless sparked strong and unanimous reactions on the international scene. António Guterres, Secretary-General of the United Nations, called the move a major blow to global cooperation against climate change. In a statement relayed by The GuardianGuterres stressed that while the deal could survive without U.S. participation, it would be a “weakened deal,” incapable of fully addressing the climate emergency.

This announcement comes as the world faces a year of unprecedented climate disasters. In California, devastating fires, linked to extreme weather conditions, have caused dozens of deaths and billions of dollars in damage. Meanwhile, destructive hurricanes, such as Helene and Milton, ravaged the southeastern United States, exacerbating the humanitarian crisis. Finally, remember that 2024 was the first year in which the average global temperature exceeded the critical threshold of 1.5°C compared to pre-industrial levels. We have thus crossed a dangerous threshold for the ecological balance of the planet. These events highlight the urgency of a coordinated international response to mitigate climate impacts and strengthen the resilience of the most exposed populations. However, the American withdrawal risks compromising these efforts. It could even encourage other countries to relax their commitments.