How the Trump administration has and will continue to shape the climate crisis for generations
The climate crisis does not pause for politics. From poisoned rivers to polluted air and shattered international cooperation, the Trump Administration’s blueprint for environmental deregulation jeopardizes ecosystems globally. As the threats to the environment intensify, the destructive environmental policies of the Trump administration, both past and future, promise to create irrevocable damage to the physical environment and will forever change the governance of climate policy in the US.
Climate and Energy:
The Trump administration rolled back over 100 environmental rules during Trump’s initial presidency in 2016. 28 related to air pollution and emissions. Most of which were revised to weaken, eliminate, or withdraw from Obama-era environmental protections. Trump’s past actions leave little room for question about his plans for his upcoming presidency. Some of his prominent, recently stated plans are to roll back methane regulations from the Biden administration for oil and gas operators, repeal Biden’s Inflation Reduction Act, which funnels hundreds of billions of dollars into greening the economy, and withdraw from the Paris Agreement (PA).
The PA is an international treaty that was established in 2015 that aims to combat climate change through the unity and global collaboration of countries around the world. Trump withdrew from the agreement in 2020, but Biden rejoined in 2021. Trump argues that the PA imposes unfair restrictions on U.S. industries, like those of coal, oil, and gas—industries that help stimulate economic growth.
The use of fossil fuels vastly increases carbon emissions and negatively impacts the environment. Additionally, if the Trump administration re-withdraws from the PA, there is a potential risk of the weakening of international climate cooperation and the removal of the US from global climate negotiations.
Dr. Carmella Whaley, environmental science and biology teacher at Minnehaha Academy, emphasizes the importance of global cooperation in addressing climate change.
“The global environment does not recognize national borders, so we might have policies in our United States that still affect other parts of the world,” said Whaley. “What we do to our environment doesn’t stay just in our country.”
Water:
Eight rollbacks relating to water pollution were enacted during Trump’s first presidency. The majority have to do with the reduced restrictions on allowing toxic discharge to enter into waterways. The Trump administration replaced the 2015 Obama Waters of the United States (WOTUS) rule with the Navigable Waters Protection Rule (NWPR). As reported by The New York Times, WOTUS was created to reduce pollution for around 60 percent of the US’ bodies of water, thus protecting around one-third of the US population’s sources of drinking water.
“Water is a very important aspect of biological life,” said Whaley. “Organisms are 70 to 90% water, and we are part of the water cycle. There’s a finite amount of water in our ecosystems, so pollutants, toxins, or anything else that’s going to harm the natural health of the water is going to harm our bodies.”
The NWPR reduces federal protection of wetlands and bodies of water. It was repealed in 2021 under Biden but will be reinstated or a similar rule will be enacted in the next Trump presidency. The NWPR and similar rules make MN especially vulnerable due to the state’s extreme water-centricity. MN’s social, economic, and cultural reliance on waterways is a crucial priority for the state. This priority could become a problem if the Trump administration allows few restrictions relating to water pollution. His early revocations allowed mining debris to be dumped into local waterways, something that would become an even more detrimental factor in MN’s Boundary Water Canoe Area Wilderness (BWCAW). The BWCAW is land located in MN’s Superior National Forest, made up of over one million acres of forests, water sources, and wetlands that have been protected by the US Forest Service since 1964.
Mining and Resource Extraction:
Photo by Greta Stromberg on Minnehaha Academy Fellows Leadership Track retreat to the MN Boundary Waters (BWCA) for Core Formation Experience.
Toxic heavy metal release and mine drainage will adversely affect aquatic life and the quality of watersheds and drinking water in the Boundary Waters Canoe Area (BWCA). The company Twin Metals, which owns the mine near the Boundary Waters, is a subsidiary of the Chilean mining
company Antofagasta, one of the world’s largest mining conglomerates. Antofagasta has a long history of environmental disasters. From chemical spills into rivers to the privatization of water in various areas of Chile. Antofagasta raises considerable red flags in the context of the Boundary Waters because of its controversial past. The Luksic Group, co-owner of Antofagasta, is owned by the Luksic family, which has intimacy with the Trump family. As reported by Save the Boundary Waters, “Luksic of Antofagasta reportedly spent $5.5 million to make a mansion available to members of the First Family and top advisors to President Donald Trump at a time when Antofagasta is suing the United States to try to force renewal of mineral leases near the Boundary Waters.” (STBW).
Advocates for the BWCA argue that this private relationship between the families is a significant cause for concern, as it may lead to insider influence allowing Antofagasta greater freedom to harm the environment.
The Twin Metals mine in the BWCA area is a copper-sulfide mine. Sulfide-ore copper mining can create acid mine drainage. When sulfide minerals are exposed to air and water, they create sulfuric acid, which can leach heavy metals into the surrounding bodies of water. These heavy metals negatively impact the BWCA through the contamination of its interconnected waterways. The contamination can spread rapidly, thus impacting the environmental ecosystems far beyond the mining site. The wetlands of the BWCA are particularly vulnerable, which would impact wildlife habitats and water filtration systems. The leaching can harm aquatic life, terrestrial animals, soil, and groundwater.
“Toxins are usually the most detrimental to the smallest animals and plants, like algae, and those small plants are eaten by bigger and bigger animals, going up the food chain, biomagnifying the toxins,” said Whaley. “In the highest level in the food chain, those organisms are greatly affected because they eat so many of the ones below them that that toxin magnifies in the body.”
Every organism’s quality of life in, and environmental preservation of, the BWCA would be destroyed with the beckoning of Twin Metals mining.
“It would be devastating to the life of the aquatic organisms and then extrapolate to every other organism on the land.”
Photo by Greta Stromberg on Minnehaha Academy Fellows Leadership Track retreat to the MN Boundary Waters (BWCA) for Core Formation Experience.
Project 2025:
Project 2025 is a conservative political initiative designed by the Heritage Foundation. It was created in 2022 to be used as a blueprint for a potential Republican presidential candidate to make major reforms within the American government. It is a nearly 1,000-page policy that covers nearly every aspect of the government as it stands today. One of the major topics for concern in the policy is the environmental implications if it were to be instated. Some of the implications would be:
- Continued rollbacks on environmental regulations through reducing the authority of agencies like the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA)
- Increased fossil fuel development through the prioritization of energy independence through domestic oil, gas, and coal production
- Reduction and elimination of climate change initiatives that aim to reduce carbon emissions and become net-zero
- Increases in the privatization of federal land responsible for logging, mining, and energy extraction
- Various notions of antiglobalization prioritize US interests over international environmental efforts.
The policies of Project 2025 would weaken ecosystem resilience, adversely affect public health, and make the U.S. less equipped to tackle the climate crisis. If the aforementioned policies and rollbacks are reinstated and/or expanded in the next Trump presidency, there will be disastrous consequences for US and global ecosystems. The health of the planet and that of future generations is jeopardized by the potential legacy of destruction led by the incoming presidential administration.