Why carbon emissions will fall under Trump

In a recent op-ed for RealClearEnergy, Benjamin Dierker argues that carbon emissions will decrease under the administration of President Donald Trump, despite criticism from environmentalists. Dierker points to historical trends and the potential for innovation as key factors. He contends that reducing government regulation and embracing performance-based incentives will lead to more efficient and cleaner energy solutions.

Key Details:

In his first week back in office, President Trump exited the Paris Climate Accord, removed restrictions on LNG exports, and boosted the hydrocarbon industry, prompting environmentalists to warn of climate setbacks.
Dierker predicts that by 2030, these moves will result in lower carbon dioxide and greenhouse gas emissions due to increased innovation.
He argues that historical data shows U.S. carbon emissions have been declining since peaking in 2005-2007, largely due to the shift from coal to natural gas.

Diving Deeper:

Benjamin Dierker, writing for RealClearEnergy, challenges conventional environmental narratives by predicting a decline in carbon emissions under President Donald Trump’s administration. In his op-ed, “Why Carbon Emissions Will Fall Under Trump,” Dierker cites historical trends and advances in innovation as reasons why emissions will decrease despite the administration’s pro-hydrocarbon policies.

Dierker highlights Trump’s early actions, including exiting the Paris Climate Accord, lifting LNG export restrictions, and promoting hydrocarbon development in Alaska and across the U.S. These moves have drawn sharp criticism from environmentalists who argue that rolling back regulations will result in higher emissions and environmental degradation. However, Dierker argues the opposite, stating, “I believe that by 2030, the impact of this administration will be less carbon dioxide and greenhouse gases. The simple reason: innovation.”

Pointing to historical context, Dierker notes that while U.S. carbon dioxide emissions grew for a century, they peaked between 2005 and 2007 and have since been declining. He attributes this decrease not to international climate agreements but to technological advancements, particularly hydraulic fracturing and the increased use of natural gas. According to Dierker, “The story of the 21st Century to date has been more efficient energy resources displacing less efficient ones.”

Dierker challenges the notion that economic growth inherently leads to more emissions, noting that between 2000 and 2020, the U.S. population grew by nearly 20%, while annual CO2 emissions fell by 20%. He attributes this to enhanced efficiency and technological progress, emphasizing that “serving this larger population with new power, water, internet, and roadways was more efficient over time, not necessitating greater emissions.”

Dierker also argues that Trump’s focus on deregulation will not lead to increased pollution, as critics suggest. He explains that many businesses have already made capital-intensive investments in clean and efficient technologies that they are unlikely to abandon simply because regulations are removed. He contends, “The technology and assets already in place are clean, efficient, and powerful; they won’t be abandoned because the regulations go away.”

Further, Dierker criticizes prescriptive regulations, which mandate specific technologies or methods, for stifling innovation. He points to the 45Q tax credit, which incentivizes carbon capture technology but fails to encourage more efficient methods, such as processes that decarbonize natural gas by separating hydrogen and solid carbon. He asserts, “One that yields two valuable co-products: clean hydrogen for power and industrial use and solid carbon to serve as a construction material to build and improve American infrastructure.”

Dierker concludes with optimism, suggesting that Trump’s regulatory approach, coupled with innovation, will lead to “greater safety, efficiency, and resilience of our nation’s infrastructure, supply chains, and industry.” He predicts that the U.S. will continue to reduce emissions while enhancing its economic and industrial capacities, ultimately leading to “a cleaner and healthier America.”

Related Topics:#PresidentTrump MXMNews TrumpCarbonEmissions TrumpEnergy

Up Next

There is no better time for the Atlantic to follow the Pacific as the next stage of Canadian energy development

Don't Miss

Zelenskyy Says He Still Wants To Sign Mineral Deal With US After Oval Office Spat With Trump

Todayville

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

Manhunt on for suspect in shooting deaths of Minnesota House speaker, husband

Canadian Energy Centre / 5 hours ago

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Alberta / 5 hours ago

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Canadian Energy Centre

Cross-Canada economic benefits of the proposed Northern Gateway Pipeline project

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Canadian Energy Centre

Billions in government revenue and thousands of jobs across provinces

Announced in 2006, the Northern Gateway project would have built twin pipelines between Bruderheim, Alta. and a marine terminal at Kitimat, B.C.

One pipeline would export 525,000 barrels per day of heavy oil from Alberta to tidewater markets. The other would import 193,000 barrels per day of condensate to Alberta to dilute heavy oil for pipeline transportation.

The project would have generated significant economic benefits across Canada.

The following projections are drawn from the report Public Interest Benefits of the Northern Gateway Project (Wright Mansell Research Ltd., July 2012), which was submitted as reply evidence during the regulatory process.

Financial figures have been adjusted to 2025 dollars using the Bank of Canada’s Inflation Calculator, with $1.00 in 2012 equivalent to $1.34 in 2025.

Total Government Revenue by Region

Between 2019 and 2048, a period encompassing both construction and operations, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following total government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia

Provincial government revenue: $11.5 billion
Federal government revenue: $8.9 billion
Total: $20.4 billion

Alberta

Provincial government revenue: $49.4 billion
Federal government revenue: $41.5 billion
Total: $90.9 billion

Ontario

Provincial government revenue: $1.7 billion
Federal government revenue: $2.7 billion
Total: $4.4 billion

Quebec

Provincial government revenue: $746 million
Federal government revenue: $541 million
Total: $1.29 billion

Saskatchewan

Provincial government revenue: $6.9 billion
Federal government revenue: $4.4 billion
Total: $11.3 billion

Other

Provincial government revenue: $1.9 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.4 billion
Total: $3.3 billion

Canada

Provincial government revenue: $72.1 billion
Federal government revenue: $59.4 billion
Total: $131.7 billion

Annual Government Revenue by Region

Over the period 2019 and 2048, the Northern Gateway project was projected to generate the following annual government revenues by region (direct, indirect and induced):

British Columbia

Provincial government revenue: $340 million
Federal government revenue: $261 million
Total: $601 million per year

Alberta

Provincial government revenue: $1.5 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.2 billion
Total: $2.7 billion per year

Ontario

Provincial government revenue: $51 million
Federal government revenue: $79 million
Total: $130 million per year

Quebec

Provincial government revenue: $21 million
Federal government revenue: $16 million
Total: $37 million per year

Saskatchewan

Provincial government revenue: $204 million
Federal government revenue: $129 million
Total: $333 million per year

Other

Provincial government revenue: $58 million
Federal government revenue: $40 million
Total: $98 million per year

Canada

Provincial government revenue: $2.1 billion
Federal government revenue: $1.7 billion
Total: $3.8 billion per year

Employment by Region

Over the period 2019 to 2048, the Northern Gateway Pipeline was projected to generate the following direct, indirect and induced full-time equivalent (FTE) jobs by region:

British Columbia

Annual average: 7,736
Total over the period: 224,344

Alberta

Annual average: 11,798
Total over the period: 342,142

Ontario

Annual average: 3,061
Total over the period: 88,769

Quebec

Annual average: 1,003
Total over the period: 29,087

Saskatchewan

Annual average: 2,127
Total over the period: 61,683

Other

Annual average: 953
Total over the period: 27,637

Canada

Annual average: 26,678
Total over the period: 773,662

Alberta

Albertans need clarity on prime minister’s incoherent energy policy

Published on June 15, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Tegan Hill

The new government under Prime Minister Mark Carney recently delivered its throne speech, which set out the government’s priorities for the coming term. Unfortunately, on energy policy, Albertans are still waiting for clarity.

Prime Minister Carney’s position on energy policy has been confusing, to say the least. On the campaign trail, he promised to keep Trudeau’s arbitrary emissions cap for the oil and gas sector, and Bill C-69 (which opponents call the “no more pipelines act”). Then, two weeks ago, he said his government will “change things at the federal level that need to be changed in order for projects to move forward,” adding he may eventually scrap both the emissions cap and Bill C-69.

His recent cabinet appointments further muddied his government’s position. On one hand, he appointed Tim Hodgson as the new minister of Energy and Natural Resources. Hodgson has called energy “Canada’s superpower” and promised to support oil and pipelines, and fix the mistrust that’s been built up over the past decade between Alberta and Ottawa. His appointment gave hope to some that Carney may have a new approach to revitalize Canada’s oil and gas sector.

On the other hand, he appointed Julie Dabrusin as the new minister of Environment and Climate Change. Dabrusin was the parliamentary secretary to the two previous environment ministers (Jonathan Wilkinson and Steven Guilbeault) who opposed several pipeline developments and were instrumental in introducing the oil and gas emissions cap, among other measures designed to restrict traditional energy development.

To confuse matters further, Guilbeault, who remains in Carney’s cabinet albeit in a diminished role, dismissed the need for additional pipeline infrastructure less than 48 hours after Carney expressed conditional support for new pipelines.

The throne speech was an opportunity to finally provide clarity to Canadians—and specifically Albertans—about the future of Canada’s energy industry. During her first meeting with Prime Minister Carney, Premier Danielle Smith outlined Alberta’s demands, which include scrapping the emissions cap, Bill C-69 and Bill C-48, which bans most oil tankers loading or unloading anywhere on British Columbia’s north coast (Smith also wants Ottawa to support an oil pipeline to B.C.’s coast). But again, the throne speech provided no clarity on any of these items. Instead, it contained vague platitudes including promises to “identify and catalyse projects of national significance” and “enable Canada to become the world’s leading energy superpower in both clean and conventional energy.”

Until the Carney government provides a clear plan to address the roadblocks facing Canada’s energy industry, private investment will remain on the sidelines, or worse, flow to other countries. Put simply, time is up. Albertans—and Canadians—need clarity. No more flip flopping and no more platitudes.