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

Most Canadians say retaliatory tariffs on American goods contribute to raising the price of essential goods at home

Alberta / 2 hours ago

Cross-Canada NGL corridor will stretch from B.C. to Ontario

Business / 2 hours ago

B.C. premier wants a private pipeline—here’s how you make that happen

Alberta

Cross-Canada NGL corridor will stretch from B.C. to Ontario

Published on July 12, 2025

Todayville

Keyera Corp.’s natural gas liquids facilities in Fort Saskatchewan. Photo courtesy Keyera Corp.

From the Canadian Energy Centre

By Will Gibson

Keyera ‘Canadianizes’ natural gas liquids with $5.15 billion acquisition

Sarnia, Ont., which sits on the southern tip of Lake Huron and peers across the St. Clair River to Michigan, is a crucial energy hub for much of the eastern half of Canada and parts of the United States.

With more than 60 industrial facilities including refineries and chemical plants that produce everything from petroleum, resins, synthetic rubber, plastics, lubricants, paint, cosmetics and food additives in the southwestern Ontario city, Mayor Mike Bradley admits the ongoing dialogue about tariffs with Canada’s southern neighbour hits close to home.

So Bradley welcomed the announcement that Calgary-based Keyera Corp. will acquire the majority of Plains American Pipelines LLP’s Canadian natural gas liquids (NGL) business, creating a cross-Canada NGL corridor that includes a storage hub in Sarnia.

“As a border city, we’ve been on the frontline of the tariff wars, so we support anything that helps enhance Canadian sovereignty and jobs,” says the long-time mayor, who was first elected in 1988.

The assets in Sarnia are a key piece of the $5.15 billion transaction, which will connect natural gas liquids from the growing Montney and Duvernay plays in B.C. and Alberta to markets in central Canada and the eastern U.S. seaboard.

Map courtesy Keyera Corp.

NGLs are hydrocarbons found within natural gas streams including ethane, propane and pentanes. They are important energy sources and used to produce a wide range of everyday items, from plastics and clothing to fuels.

Keyera CEO Dean Setoguchi cast the proposed acquisition as an act of repatriation.

“This transaction brings key NGL infrastructure under Canadian ownership, enhancing domestic energy capabilities and reinforcing Canada’s economic resilience by keeping value and decision-making closer to home,” Setoguchi told analysts in a June 17 call.

“Plains’ portfolio forms a fully integrated cross Canada NGL system connecting Western Canada supply to key demand centres across the Prairie provinces, Ontario and eastern U.S.,” he said.

“The system includes strategic hubs like Empress, Fort Saskatchewan and Sarnia – which provide a reliable source of Canadian NGL supply to extensive fractionation, storage, pipeline and logistics infrastructure.”

Martin King, RBN Energy’s managing director of North America Energy Market Analysis, sees Keyera’s ability to “Canadianize” its NGL infrastructure as improving the company’s growth prospects.

“It allows them to tap into the Duvernay and Montney, which are the fastest growing NGL plays in North America and gives them some key assets throughout the country,” said the Calgary-based analyst.

“The crown assets are probably the straddle plants in Empress, which help strip out the butane, ethane and other liquids for condensate. It also positions them well to serve the eastern half of the country.”

And that’s something welcomed in Sarnia.

“Having a Canadian source for natural gas would be our preference so we see Keyera’s acquisition as strengthening our region as an energy hub,” Bradley said.

“We are optimistic this will be good for our region in the long run.”

The acquisition is expected to close in the first quarter of 2026, pending regulatory approvals.

Meanwhile, the governments of Ontario and Alberta are joining forces to strengthen the economies of both regions, and the country, by advancing major infrastructure projects including pipelines, ports and rail.

A joint feasibility study is expected this year on how to move major private sector-led investments forward.

Business

B.C. premier wants a private pipeline—here’s how you make that happen

Published on July 12, 2025

Todayville

From the Fraser Institute

By Julio Mejía and Elmira Aliakbari

At the federal level, the Carney government should scrap several Trudeau-era policies including Bill C-69 (which introduced vague criteria into energy project assessments including the effects on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors”)

The Eby government has left the door (slightly) open to Alberta’s proposed pipeline to the British Columbia’s northern coast. Premier David Eby said he isn’t opposed to a new pipeline that would expand access to Asian markets—but he does not want government to pay for it. That’s a fair condition. But to attract private investment for pipelines and other projects, both the Eby government and the Carney government must reform the regulatory environment.

First, some background.

Trump’s tariffs against Canadian products underscore the risks of heavily relying on the United States as the primary destination for our oil and gas—Canada’s main exports. In 2024, nearly 96 per cent of oil exports and virtually all natural gas exports went to our southern neighbour. Clearly, Canada must diversify our energy export markets. Expanded pipelines to transport oil and gas, mostly produced in the Prairies, to coastal terminals would allow Canada’s energy sector to find new customers in Asia and Europe and become less reliant on the U.S. In fact, following the completion of the Trans Mountain Pipeline expansion between Alberta and B.C. in May 2024, exports to non-U.S. destinations increased by almost 60 per cent.

However, Canada’s uncompetitive regulatory environment continues to create uncertainty and deter investment in the energy sector. According to a 2023 survey of oil and gas investors, 68 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment in Canada compared to only 41 per cent of respondents for the U.S. And 59 per cent said the cost of regulatory compliance deters investment compared to 42 per cent in the U.S.

When looking at B.C. specifically, investor perceptions are even worse. Nearly 93 per cent of respondents for the province said uncertainty over environmental regulations deters investment while 92 per cent of respondents said uncertainty over protected lands deters investment. Among all Canadian jurisdictions included in the survey, investors said B.C. has the greatest barriers to investment.

How can policymakers help make B.C. more attractive to investment?

At the federal level, the Carney government should scrap several Trudeau-era policies including Bill C-69 (which introduced vague criteria into energy project assessments including the effects on the “intersection of sex and gender with other identity factors”), Bill C-48 (which effectively banned large oil tankers off B.C.’s northern coast, limiting access to Asian markets), and the proposed cap on greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions in the oil and gas sector (which will likely lead to a reduction in oil and gas production, decreasing the need for new infrastructure and, in turn, deterring investment in the energy sector).

At the provincial level, the Eby government should abandon its latest GHG reduction targets, which discourage investment in the energy sector. Indeed, in 2023 provincial regulators rejected a proposal from FortisBC, the province’s main natural gas provider, because it did not align with the Eby government’s emission-reduction targets.

Premier Eby is right—private investment should develop energy infrastructure. But to attract that investment, the province must have clear, predictable and competitive regulations, which balance environmental protection with the need for investment, jobs and widespread prosperity. To make B.C. and Canada a more appealing destination for investment, both federal and provincial governments must remove the regulatory barriers that keep capital away.