How Trump’s Proposed Energy Policies Could Impact Your Green Energy Incentives

Introduction

The return of former president and now president-elect Donald J. Trump to the White House signals a potential pivot in U.S. energy policy, particularly concerning green energy incentives. While the Biden administration’s Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) has been praised as a cornerstone of clean energy advancement, Trump’s proposals to partially repeal the act and redirect unspent funds could significantly alter the course of the nation’s energy priorities.

This article examines how these proposed policy changes might affect key sectors such as commercial real estate, electric vehicles, and renewable energy, while also exploring the broader economic and geopolitical ramifications. As stakeholders navigate this shifting landscape, understanding the potential impacts will be critical for planning and advocacy efforts.

Background on Green Energy Incentives

The Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) has played a significant role in advancing U.S. climate objectives, aiming to cut emissions by 40% by 2030 while fostering job creation and technological innovation. Key incentives introduced by the IRA include:

• Tax Credits for CRE Energy Efficiency: Encouraging upgrades in lighting, HVAC systems, and insulation to improve energy performance.
• EV Subsidies: Providing up to $7,500 in clean vehicle credits and expanding charging infrastructure to accelerate electric vehicle adoption.
• Advanced Manufacturing Support: Offering incentives for domestic production of batteries, solar panels, and wind turbines, strengthening supply chains.

These measures have attracted over $369 billion in investments and supported approximately 300,000 jobs, with notable economic benefits across various regions, including traditionally conservative districts.

Proposed Energy Policy Changes

Partial Repeal of the Inflation Reduction Act

Proposals under discussion include a partial repeal of unspent IRA funds, with adjustments potentially targeting the following:

• EV Tax Credits: The 30D and 25E credits, which provide upfront discounts for electric vehicle buyers, could be reduced or eliminated.
• Advanced Manufacturing Credits (45X): Potential changes could involve stricter sourcing rules for critical materials, affecting domestic and international supply chains.
• Grant Programs: Funding for clean energy projects and emerging technologies could be scaled back.

EPA Standards and EV Mandates

Proposals to revise or eliminate federal EV mandates, including zero-emission vehicle standards, could:

• Alleviate short-term cost pressures on automakers.
• Slow the development of planned gigafactories for EV battery production.

Expansion of Fossil Fuel Production

Future policy directions may include:

• Opening additional federal lands for drilling.
• Supporting liquefied natural gas (LNG) export projects.
• Revising methane emission regulations.

While these measures could boost fossil fuel production in the short term, industry analysts suggest limited room for substantial increases due to current market dynamics and record production levels.

Potential Impacts on Key Sectors

Energy Efficiency in Commercial Real Estate (CRE)

• Loss of Incentives: Without federal tax credits, sustainable building upgrades could become costlier for property owners.
• Stalled Progress: Efforts to reduce emissions and energy consumption in commercial buildings may slow, impacting the sector’s role in climate goals.

Electric Vehicles and Charging Infrastructure

• Slowed Adoption: Removing EV tax credits may make these vehicles less accessible to consumers, potentially dampening sales.
• Supply Chain Disruption: Reduced incentives could hinder domestic manufacturing of EV components, increasing reliance on foreign imports.
• Impact on the Auto Industry: While regulatory rollbacks might provide short-term relief, they could risk U.S. leadership in global EV innovation.

Economic and Geopolitical Implications

Domestic Challenges

Policy changes could face resistance, even within party lines, given the benefits seen in many districts. For example:

• Hyundai’s $7 billion EV and battery plant in Georgia, creating 8,000 jobs.
• Toyota’s $8.2 billion car battery facility in North Carolina, poised for significant expansion.

Global Leadership and Strategic Competition

A shift away from clean energy policies could:

• Strengthen other nations’ dominance, such as China’s, in renewable energy production and technology.
• Impact U.S. market share and competitiveness in the global clean technology sector.
• Reduce alignment with international climate initiatives, affecting global cooperation.

Long-Term Risks

Scaling back clean energy initiatives could disrupt an estimated $80 billion in potential investments and $50 billion in export opportunities, with significant long-term economic implications.

Balancing Energy Independence and Innovation

Proposals for expanded fossil fuel production aim to reinforce U.S. energy independence. Industry groups like the American Petroleum Institute (API) suggest a balanced approach, combining energy security measures with policies that encourage innovation, such as:

• Reassessing fuel economy standards.
• Expanding offshore drilling leases.
• Maintaining competitive leadership in energy markets.

Market Resilience and Clean Energy Momentum

Despite potential rollbacks, clean energy’s growth may persist due to:

• Cost Competitiveness: Solar and wind energy remain among the most affordable energy sources.
• Consumer Demand: Public interest in sustainable practices continues to drive market adoption.
• Nuclear Energy: Expanded nuclear power development could offset reductions in other renewable initiatives.

Conclusion

Proposed changes to energy policy reflect a departure from the IRA’s focus on sustainable growth and decarbonization. However, the combination of market forces, bipartisan support in key areas, and ongoing technological innovation may temper the impact of potential rollbacks. Stakeholders in commercial real estate, EV manufacturing, and renewable energy sectors should prepare for a dynamic policy environment by advocating for balanced solutions that support innovation, economic growth, and energy security.

‍

Sources:

• Fox News Digital. (2024). Leave the oil to me: Trump vows to unleash US energy, undo key Biden rules in 2nd term. Fox News Digital. Retrieved from [https://www.foxnews.com/politics/leave-oil-me-trump-vows-unleash-u-s-energy-undo-key-biden-rules-second-term]

• CNN. (2024). It’s not just Democrats — Republicans are working to Trump-proof their climate money. CNN. Retrieved from [https://edition.cnn.com/2024/11/15/climate/climate-law-trump-republicans/index.html]
  
  
• Guardian. (2024). Trump promise to repeal Biden climate policies could cost US billions, report finds. The Guardian. Retrieved from [https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/nov/14/trump-clean-energy-climate-policies]

• The Conversation. (2024). What Trump can do to reverse US climate policy − and what he probably can’t change. The Conversation. Retrieved from [https://theconversation.com/what-trump-can-do-to-reverse-us-climate-policy-and-what-he-probably-cant-change-243129]

• Hotter Commodities. (2024). Inflation Reduction Act in focus in Trump presidency. Hotter Commodities. Retrieved from [https://www.fastmarkets.com/insights/inflation-reduction-act-in-focus-in-trump-presidency-andrea-hotter/]