COP29 and Beyond: The Future of US Climate Policy at a Crossroads
As the 29th annual UN Climate Change Conference (COP29) draws to a close this week in Baku, Azerbaijan, the world watches with bated breath, eager to see if leaders can rise to the challenge of addressing the climate crisis. The two-week summit has been a whirlwind of negotiations, debates, and critical decisions. Among the key questions: Will countries commit to more ambitious emissions reduction targets? Can nations agree on a new climate finance target to replace the existing $100 billion pledge set in 2009? And, perhaps, most importantly, how will the recent political shifts in the United States, particularly in the wake of the results of its 2024 Presidential Election, impact global climate action? COP29 as an Opportunity to Advance Climate Finance This COP summit is a defining moment in global climate governance as leaders are expected to establish a New Collective Quantified Goal (NCQG) on climate finance to replace the 2009 target. The NCQG is a collectively negotiated climate financing amount provided by developed to developing nations to aid their transition to a low-carbon future. These funds—often presented as loans, grants, or public-private partnerships—are intended to support climate adaptation and mitigation efforts. At present, economists estimate that emerging markets and developing countries excluding China will need about $2.4 trillion a year by 2030 to meet climate goals. For many in the developing world, climate finance and climate justice are interlinked concepts. The disproportionate impact of climate change on poorer nations stems from a legacy of inequity. Historically, developed countries have not only been the primary contributors to greenhouse gas emissions but also amassed immense wealth by extracting valuable natural resources—such as coal, minerals, and more—from the Global South during colonial and industrial eras. These resources fueled and financed their industrial revolutions, often at the expense of the economic and ecological stability of the regions they exploited. Closing the climate funding gap is not only necessary for emissions reduction but also critical to building equitable solutions for the future. Uncertain U.S. Climate Leadership Amid Political Shifts While discussions at COP29 underscore the importance of global climate finance and a shared commitment to climate action, one notable absence looms: U.S. President Joe Biden. His absence at the summit, especially in light of Donald Trump’s recent election victory, casts a shadow over the future of U.S. climate leadership. Mr. Trump’s recent remarks at a Detroit, MI, campaign rally where he said, “We will frack, frack, frack, and drill, baby, drill” has climate advocates and international observers worried that the United States is not committed to long-term climate action at home or abroad. Particularly since world leaders, at COP28 in Dubai last year, agreed to transition away from fossil fuels, a stark but welcome departure from their previous stance of solely calling for restrictions. Many view Mr. Trump’s rhetoric and recent cabinet picks—for instance, his Energy Secretary pick, Chris Wright, CEO of the oil and natural gas fracking services company, Liberty Energy, has said, “There is no climate crisis, and we’re not in the midst of an energy transition either”—as emblematic shifts away from the progress achieved under the Biden administration. Despite these concerns, there is reason to believe that the U.S. clean energy transition is too far advanced to reverse. While one might view these as naïve musings rooted in blind hope for a better future, these perspectives are far from mere idealistic delusion. They are bolstered by a diverse range of stakeholders, including Democratic and Republican lawmakers, as well as powerful oil and gas lobbies who recognize the economic potential of the clean energy transition. This growing coalition of unlikely partners offers hope that the clean energy transition is a goal capable of weathering the storms of political change. John Podesta, Senior Advisor to the President for International Climate Policy, and the US climate envoy to COP29, underscored this point, stating, “While the United States federal government under Donald Trump may put climate action on the back burner, the work to contain climate change is going to continue in the United States with commitment and passion and belief.” “The historic investments under President Biden and Vice President Harris have crucially been government-enabled but private-sector led. In total, just since the President took office, companies have announced more than $450 billion in new clean energy investments,” Podesta continued. The ‘historic investments’ Podesta is referring to are a product of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) (more commonly referred to as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law or BIL). Although their names might not reflect it, the IRA and BIL are historic pieces of climate legislation. The BIL authorizes $1.2 trillion for transportation and infrastructure spending, with historic allocations for clean energy and grid modernization projects, electric vehicle infrastructure, and other climate resilience projects. It is not surprising that Mr. Trump has not targeted the BIL for repeal, given that the law was a product of bipartisan collaboration. Instead, his focus has been on repealing the IRA, which passed without any Republican votes and included a broader range of climate-related financial incentives. In particular, Mr. Trump has said, “To further defeat inflation, my plan will terminate the Green New Deal, which I call the Green New Scam.” He added, “It actually sets us back, as opposed to moves us forward. And [I will] rescind all unspent funds under the misnamed Inflation Reduction Act.” Although Mr. Trump has expressed intentions to dismantle the IRA, there is a growing sense that a full repeal may be unlikely as many in his party and the business community recognize the economic opportunities the IRA presents. The Inflation Reduction Act: Transformative Climate Legislation This raises several questions: what exactly is the IRA, and how has it managed to gain such widespread support, even from sectors that traditionally align with Republican interests? More importantly, is Mr. Trump’s criticism of the IRA warranted, or will his sweeping claims prove to be shortsighted as the act continues to deliver measurable benefits across the U.S. economy? The Inflation
