Estimated time of reading: ~ 4 minutes

Energy and climate are crucial issues on the international stage and obviously a relevant part of any political discussion on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean for the coming years and maybe decades. For this reason, the European Union is paying a lot of attention to the way the two candidates for the White House, former president Donald Trump for the Republicans and current vice president Kamala Harris for the Democrats, are talking about energy and climate in their presidential campaigns. Trump already made clear that he is willing to support a relevant shift in the energy policy of the United States, favouring the use of fossil fuels and opting for a significant scaling back of renewable sources. The former US president believes that such changes are necessary in order to reduce energy costs in the United States, together with achieving what he calls “energy dominance.” In this context, the Republican candidate aims to boost the competitiveness of U.S. industries by moving the country away from its obligations due to the Paris Agreement. Trump also promised to remove regulations on drilling for oil and gas on US soil. This general view is clearly at odds with the EU Green Deal and any other energy and climate plans elaborated by European countries in recent years. A potential second term at the White House for Donald Trump could create a great fracture between the US and the EU when it comes to green policies, thus prompting a tense confrontation on any debate referring to climate action. 
Kamala Harris should instead promote policies in line with the goals of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA), which disposes funds for energy and climate projects aimed at reducing carbon emissions by 40% by 2030. Still, Harris does not believe that completely backing away from oil and gas would be a wise decision for the US authorities, especially in the context of keeping jobs in some key states. The move towards a clean energy economy would thus be balanced by pragmatic actions on sectors considered still important for US industries. Moreover, in a recent interview, Harris stated that, as president, she wouldn’t ban fracking, the technique for extracting natural gas from shale. The Democratic candidate believes that the United States can increase “a thriving clean energy economy without banning fracking.” Harris also highlighted that the current Biden administration already managed to create 300,000 clean energy jobs in both 2021 and 2022. It is clear that with a future Harris presidency, it would be easier for the EU authorities to find common ground on climate and energy measures with the US. While it is possible that the next EU Commission, with the second term of Ursula von der Leyen, will promote a more balanced approach to green issues, any potential outcome would benefit from a greater affinity with the plans and strategies pursued by the United States. Moving forward to a cleaner and more sustainable economy while a key ally and trade partner moves the way opposite would be quite complicated for the EU and the European member states.

At the same time, as the Russia invasion of Ukraine thought to governments and firms in the European Union, any crisis can become an opportunity if there is the political and economic will to overcome it in a both creative and reliable way.

Written by: Francesco Marino