DRILL THE EARTH: The Benefits and Wounds

As we storm into the 2nd quarter of the 21st century, 47th president Donald Trump has been reelected, and since settling into office, he has made many contributions to the way the US as a country is run. However, out of all of these laws that he has passed, one stands out in particular as possibly a step backwards from the global progress of moving towards eco friendly energy production, to old fashioned thermal power generation which has recently been opposed, globally for its clear association with climate change and air pollution. 

However, to understand why Trump has committed to this executive order, we must understand the economical benefits within America by restarting the fossil fuel industry. 

1. Boosts the overall American economy - President Trump argues that increasing oil and gas production will increase job opportunities for people in America, while lowering energy prices and costs for American residents. Oil and gas prices saw a average increase of 11% per year for consumers, and over the last 5 years, an approximate increase of a whopping 70%. Trump aims to reverse this trend of absurd energy price increase to benefit consumers. He has pledged that he will reduce energy costs by 50%. However, experts suggest that it may not be that easy considering global market dynamics and production cost. 

2. Secures energy independence - Trump majorly aims to reduce dependence on foreign oil powers such as Russia and Saudi Arabia as their main fuel suppliers. Part of this was due to the deranged price increase caused by the war in Russia. The US banned any import from Russia, causing shortages and higher prices. In addition to that, European countries increased their dependence on American LNG (Liquefied natural gas) companies to supply them with energy. This sudden push in demand resultantly pushed up prices within America. 

3. Boosts US oil exports and trade influence - By implementing this policy, the US could see a surge in oil and gas production, potentially surpassing 13 million barrels per day, solidifying its position as the world’s top producer. Furthermore, the US can use its growing energy dominance to exert influence over global markets. By increasing exports, the US would have greater leverage in geopolitical negotiations. For example, supplying more LNG to Europe would give the US increased influence in EU-Russia relations.

With every benefit, there comes the negatives. In this case, the main disadvantages will be the environmental concerns. President Trump believes that the benefits will completely overshadow the disadvantages. Nevertheless, it is for you, the reader to judge. So now, let’s explore the negative effects. 

1. Environmental damage - First, there is the crystal clear presage of increase in carbon emissions. This oil drilling policy will directly contradict with policies that previous administrations have set, such as the goal of becoming net-zero with emissions of greenhouse gases, in the atmosphere by 2050. Moreover, rescinding the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which promotes sustainable and renewable energy and brings in around $25 Billion dollars each year to private companies in the clean energy sector, could result in an additional 5 billion tons of carbon dioxide emissions by 2030. This will present a major setback to global efforts trying to limit the temperature increase to 1.5°C

2. Undermines clean energy investments - As mentioned previously, the IRA has generated more than $25 Billion dollars each year to private sectors. Additionally, it creates employment for tens of thousands of people in the solar, wind, and battery sectors, especially in states like Texas, Georgia, and Ohio which are republican states. Repealing the IRA would result in the losses of all these jobs and create potential backlash against Trump in these republican states. However, zooming out of domestic affairs in the US, there are bigger changes happening globally. The global energy market is rapidly shifting towards renewable and clean energy with EV cars being one example. Changing back to the old way of producing energy could result in the US missing out on an industry estimated to be around $23 billion dollars by 2030. By focusing only on oil and gas, the U.S. risks falling behind China and European allies in technologies like hydrogen, wind, and EV batteries.

Even with the quite fundamental disadvantages posed by this change, President Trump has already taken steps to make this vision a reality. Below are the steps taken so far, and the ones confirmed to come. 

Steps taken already: 

• On January 21, 2025, President Trump declared a "national energy emergency," giving his administration increased powers to promote fossil fuel development across the country.

• On February 14, 2025, an executive order established the "National Energy Dominance Council," tasked with increasing the country's oil and gas production and reducing regulatory barriers to fossil fuel development. ​

• The administration accelerated approvals for significant fossil fuel infrastructure projects, such as the Line 5 pipeline replacement in Michigan, despite environmental concerns. 

• Engaged in international agreements to maintain global reliance on fossil fuels, including deals with close allies like Japan, South Korea, and Ukraine, and advocating for coal usage in Africa.

Confirmed future plans:

• On March 12, 2025, the administration will overturn regulations on soot emissions from coal-fired power plants, allowing older, high-pollution plants to continue operating.

• On March 13, 2025, President Trump will meet with cabinet officials to discuss lowering energy prices, but also including expanding natural gas pipelines and rolling back environmental regulations.

• Throughout 2025, the administration will continue reversing environmental policies from the Biden administration, particularly emissions limits on power plants, vehicles, and fossil fuel production, to boost domestic energy output and reduce costs.

President Trump’s push to expand fossil fuel production marks a dramatic shift in US energy policy, prioritizing domestic oil and gas development over climate commitments. While his administration argues that these policies will lower energy costs, create jobs, and enhance energy independence, they also create significant environmental risks, undermining progress toward net-zero emissions and global climate agreements. With confirmed plans to roll back regulations and fast-track fossil fuel projects, the coming months will shape the future of U.S. energy either reinforcing traditional industries or sparking resistance from environmental groups and clean energy advocates. The ultimate impact of these decisions will depend on economic realities, legal battles, and the evolving political landscape.