(To get this story in your reception box, subscribe to the Time CO2 Leadership Report Newsletter here.))
In his first weeks in power, President Donald Trump sought to take a demolition ball for climate and environmental policy. He ordered his administration to reduce a wide range of regulations and aims to undermine the agencies that apply them by targeting the staff.
The moves, he says, will release companies with balloon compliance and will allow them to prosper. “Excessive recreation stops American entrepreneurship, crushes small businesses, reduces the choice of consumers, discourages innovation and breaks the freedoms of American citizens”, reads an information sheet on the White House explaining the agenda deregulation.
Some companies can celebrate, in particular small businesses where compliance costs have an influenced influence on the substance. But the speed and scale of effort for Nix Climate Regulations also have a price – and not only for efforts to reduce emissions. Companies are counting on stable political regimes to invest and develop their business. And, at the moment, any company even having a tangential link with the climate and the energy feels great uncertainty.
Despite the real financial costs of all this uncertainty, most companies hesitate to speak publicly when they are worried behind closed doors. Trump can always worsen things – continuing to target specific businesses that put themselves on his way – and therefore leaders learn to remain silent.
But in regulatory documents, where companies are legally required to clearly talk about the risks for their business, companies warn the financial consequences of rapid climate policy changes. The Ford Motor Company lists The back and forth of the climate policy between the administrations in a section on the “legal and regulatory risks” which could considerably affect their business. America Bank refer For “divergent views of stakeholders” on climatic chances and warn that the “legal risk and increased conformity” now comes from all sides while the company works on the climate. Dow, The Chemical Company, lists Climate change between its commercial risks, in particular “changes in public feeling and political leadership, including government incentives and tax credits to promote programs’ reductions”.
After the elections, the CEO of Exxonmobil Darren Woods said Semaor that the United States needs a more coherent approach. “The polarization and the political back and forth that we see in the United States are not good for the country, not good for society. It’s frankly not good for business, ”he said. “What we need is more thoughtful and consistent regulation.”
Even the changes that many companies are optimistic – think of faster permits for energy infrastructure, go with significant risks. On the one hand, it can be difficult to quickly allow projects if the workforce responsible for this has been dismissed. But, perhaps more important in the long term, this is the question of what will stand in court. A large part of what the Trump administration does through a burst of executive action will be disputed, and the time required to see this has a cost because companies remain in uncertain limbo how to deploy their funds.
During the first week of the Trump presidency, I highlighted The complexities of its anti -climate thrust – especially since its movements will face the realities of the market. But it is also true that in light of the urgency of climate change, even eraser, the market can have a significant effect, slowing down the pace of the green transition.