U.S. President Donald Trump is shifting the federal government's climate agenda away from former President Joe Biden's policies, emphasizing a stronger reliance on fossil fuels, as reported by NPR.

"We will drill, baby, drill," Trump proclaimed to the cheers of his supporters during his inaugural address on January 20, 2025. His executive orders on climate and energy have been largely welcomed by fossil fuel industry groups and their supporters, who see a promising future for oil, gas, coal, and plastics under Trump's leadership.

Continuing his first-term policies, Trump has initiated a year-long process to withdraw from the Paris Agreement, an international accord aimed at limiting climate pollution and mitigating the worst impacts of global warming. He also declared a national energy emergency and temporarily halted new wind energy projects on federal lands and in federal waters.

Despite these significant actions, many may assume that the climate and energy landscape in the United States has dramatically changed since January 20. However, it hasn’t. Human-caused climate change and the U.S. energy system are vast and complex, and they do not change quickly, even with a new president's efforts.

Biden left office having established the most ambitious climate agenda of any previous president. In 2022, with support from Democratic lawmakers, he signed the Inflation Reduction Act, which allocates hundreds of billions of dollars to enhance renewable energy, electric vehicles, and clean manufacturing. He referred to this package as “the most important climate action in the history of the world.” Trump's executive orders cannot easily undo these initiatives.

Instead, Trump's orders cut funding from both the Inflation Reduction Act and the Bipartisan Infrastructure Act. He has also directed federal agencies to explore ways to implement his priorities and initiated a lengthy rulemaking process to reverse Biden-era regulations.

To remove parts of the Inflation Reduction Act that he opposes, Trump will need to collaborate with congressional Republicans. This could be challenging, as a significant portion of the allocated funds benefit Republican constituencies, where lawmakers advocate for maintaining those benefits.