Given the historic uncertainty rocking the clean energy sector in the United States, that’s no small thing. Former President Donald Trump’s policies on migration and development continue to impact development decisions. To be sure, the Trump administration was thoroughly hostile toward renewable energy. Consequently, it enacted burdensome conditions that created an unnecessarily burdensome regulatory gauntlet that developers had to run under. His ongoing support for expansive fossil fuel development calls into question the viability of these clean energy projects, especially on our federal lands.
When he was president, Trump ordered a 60-day moratorium on every kind of renewable energy authorization. This moratorium covered leases and rights of way. This moratorium in effect stopped any new clean energy projects from proceeding during those nine months. Furthermore, Trump signed a presidential memorandum that halted onshore and offshore wind development on federal lands. This dangerous move was an unmistakable signal of the administration’s eagerness to stifle renewable progress.
In a worrying turn from international climate collaboration, Trump pulled the United States out of the Paris climate agreement. This decision became a cruel capstone to his administration’s focus on the development of fossil fuels instead of renewable resources. Many of the financial assistance programs that made it possible to support renewable energy were frozen. This added additional barriers for developers looking to invest in clean energy technologies.
The unfortunate truth is that the Trump administration’s harmful policies hit a tipping point on January 20. Another secretarial order required that energy development on federal land not give preference to renewable energy projects over hydrocarbon development. This directive had a clear influence on states such as Nevada. In this beautiful, wide-open state, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) manages nearly 80% of the land. As demonstrated by the Trump administration’s recent slipperiness in advancing clean power projects, this is not easily done. This hesitance has left stakeholders concerned about the future sustainability of these critical initiatives.
Like Ms. Ralston, other officials faced with these challenges call for a more balanced energy approach. A spokesperson for the Department of the Interior stated, “supports a sustainable and responsible all-of-the-above energy approach, which includes oil and gas, coal, geothermal, solar and strategic minerals – all of which may be developed on public lands and subject to free markets.”
As developers still struggle under the shadow of Trump’s policies, the future for clean energy under Biden is anything but certain. The perpetual influence of past bad decisions will shape the fate of renewable energy development across the United States. Unfortunately, this impact may continue for years into the future.