{"id":214226,"date":"2016-11-15T12:49:19","date_gmt":"2016-11-15T17:49:19","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/?p=214226"},"modified":"2019-03-04T17:44:09","modified_gmt":"2019-03-04T22:44:09","slug":"climate-future","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","title":{"rendered":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy"},"content":{"rendered":"<header\n\tclass=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-article-header alignfull article-header is-style-full-width-text-below centered-image\"\n\tstyle=\" \"\n>\n\t<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img fetchpriority=\"high\" decoding=\"async\" alt=\"\" height=\"403\" loading=\"eager\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\" width=\"605\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><p class=\"wp-element-caption--caption\">Daniel Schrag (clockwise from top left), head of the Harvard University Center for the Environment; Jody Freeman, faculty director of Environmental Law Program at HLS; Robert Stavins, head of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements; and Mike McElroy, Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies, believe the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle. \u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. <\/p><p class=\"wp-element-caption--credit\">File photos by Kris Snibbe, Jon Chase\/Harvard Staff Photographers<\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\t<div class=\"article-header__content\">\n\t\t\t<a\n\t\t\tclass=\"article-header__category\"\n\t\t\thref=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/science-technology\/\"\n\t\t>\n\t\t\tScience &amp; Tech\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\n\t\t<h1 class=\"article-header__title wp-block-heading \">\n\t\tWhat\u2019s next for climate change policy\t<\/h1>\n\n\t\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t<div class=\"article-header__meta\">\n\t\t<div class=\"wp-block-post-author\">\n\t\t\t<address class=\"wp-block-post-author__content\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<p class=\"author wp-block-post-author__name\">\n\t\tAlvin Powell\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t<p class=\"wp-block-post-author__byline\">\n\t\t\tHarvard Staff Writer\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/address>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t<time class=\"article-header__date\" datetime=\"2016-11-15\">\n\t\t\tNovember 15, 2016\t\t<\/time>\n\n\t\t<span class=\"article-header__reading-time\">\n\t\t\tlong read\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t\n\t\t\t<h2 class=\"article-header__subheading wp-block-heading\">\n\t\t\tA Trump administration can do plenty to undercut Obama\u2019s efforts, but it could compromise too, Harvard analysts say\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\n<\/header>\n\n\n\n<div class=\"wp-block-group alignwide has-global-padding is-content-justification-center is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n\n\n\t\t\r\n<div class=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-supporting-content alignleft supporting-content\" id=\"supporting-content-6ac00169-8500-4459-ab30-66ccb559a05a\">\n\t<div class=\"featured-articles is-post-type-post is-style-grid-list\"  style=\"\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h2 class=\"featured-articles__title wp-block-heading\">More like this<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t<ul class=\"featured-articles__list \">\n\t\t\n\t\t<li class=\"featured-article \">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<figure class=\"featured-article__image\">\n\t\t\t\t<img loading=\"lazy\" decoding=\"async\" width=\"1200\" height=\"750\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/preselectrump_ap16314285296583_605.jpg?resize=1200%2C750\" class=\"attachment-large-landscape-desktop size-large-landscape-desktop\" alt=\"\" \/>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__content\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<a class=\"featured-article__category\" href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/\">\n\t\t\tNation &amp; World\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"featured-article__title wp-block-heading \"><a href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/with-president-trump-the-road-ahead\/\">For President Trump, the road ahead<\/a><\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<time class=\"featured-article__date\" datetime=\"2016-11-09\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tNovember 9, 2016\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/time>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span class=\"featured-article__reading-time\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tlong read\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/li>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n<p>Regulations to fight climate change likely will be casualties of the incoming Trump administration, but environmental experts taking stock of the changing American political landscape said that work in the field will continue elsewhere and that a broad-based rollback of U.S. environmental protection will prove easier said than done.<\/p>\n<p>Though President-elect Donald Trump hasn\u2019t yet announced an environmental agenda, his campaign claim that climate change is an expensive hoax, his blanket support for the fossil fuel industry, and his criticism of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have environmentalists worried.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate, and they generally believe that environmental regulations can harm economic growth and improperly extend the reach of government. So environmentalists foresee a broad attack on the nation\u2019s framework of environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Still, Harvard environmental experts forecast a complex mosaic for the years ahead, one that has problems and likely is rife with litigation, but that also continues momentum toward a cleaner world because of a combination of market forces, economic factors, and continued efforts by other nations, states, and local governments.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTrump could unilaterally withdraw from the Paris Agreement, renouncing U.S. leadership on international climate negotiations. And he could try to rescind or weaken some important regulations, like the Clean Power Plan,\u201d said <a href=\"http:\/\/hls.harvard.edu\/faculty\/directory\/10285\/Freeman\">Jody Freeman<\/a>, the Archibald Cox Professor of Law and director of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.hls.harvard.edu\">Harvard Law School\u2019s<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.law.harvard.edu\/welcome\/\">Environmental Law Program<\/a>. \u201cBut any effort to fully unravel the substantial and meaningful regulatory initiatives of the last eight years will be long, complicated, and difficult, and in the end likely only partial because of the significant legal, political, and practical barriers to doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n\n<p>Federal environmental agencies likely are in for tough times, even without new laws being passed or existing ones repealed, the analysts said. The power to make political appointments and set budgets means an agency easily can be slowed by underfunding or new leadership hostile to its mission.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\/about\/faculty\/daniel-p-schrag\">Daniel Schrag<\/a>, the Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology, professor of environmental sciences and engineering, and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\">Harvard University Center for the Environment<\/a> said it\u2019s hard to project just what effect Trump\u2019s presidency will have on global climate efforts. The effects of climate change are so enormous that the actions of any one nation over four years will have limited impact.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s a long march to a low-carbon world,\u201d Schrag said. \u201cWe knew it wasn\u2019t going to be easy. Being successful means being able to weather setbacks like this one.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s even possible, he said, that a federal agenda the public sees as too hostile to climate change action could spark a backlash that leads to new reforms.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t know how you get from here to there,\u201d Schrag said. \u201c[But] there\u2019s always a path forward.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Freeman acknowledged there is a \u201clong list of worst-case scenarios\u201d but cautioned against taking campaign rhetoric at face value. It doesn\u2019t appear the president-elect has been fully briefed on climate science or fully considered the impact that withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change would have on our relationships with other nations, she said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe truth is, we don\u2019t entirely really know what President Trump will do on climate, energy, and environment,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cHis positions on other issues have changed, and that might happen here too. It is entirely possible that he will conclude that he can achieve his domestic energy agenda without jettisoning Paris, and he might even be persuaded that it makes more sense to embrace the international goal of emission reductions, but say he has a better way to get there than by Obama-style regulation. In other words, we must wait for the dust to settle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Here, then, is the tote board for what so far seems likeliest to happen on climate change issues:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Clean power and Paris<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The most probable casualties of the incoming administration are recent U.S. steps to fight climate change in the energy sector, and the United States\u2019 leadership in the international community on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan, which seeks to shift electricity generation in the United States away from polluting sources such as coal, is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If its decision supports the plan and is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, it would likely fail, since Trump has said he will appoint a conservative justice to fill the current high court vacancy.<\/p>\n<p>A simpler solution might be for the administration to withdraw the Clean Power Plan and replace it with a less-stringent version, which would be within the new president\u2019s power, Freeman said in an analysis of the environmental ramifications of a Trump presidency.<\/p>\n<p>Another probable target is the Paris Agreement, which Trump said he would cancel. While upending the entire agreement, negotiated by 195 countries, is beyond his power, Trump could withdraw the United States\u2019 participation. Since the agreement has taken effect, that process would take four years to accomplish, according to <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.harvard.edu\/stavins\/home\">Robert Stavins<\/a>, the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu\/project\/56\/harvard_project_on_climate_agreements.html\">Harvard Project on Climate Agreements<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, Trump also could submit the plan to the U.S. Senate to ratify, where it most likely would fail, Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p>The most dramatic option for a Trump administration would be to try to remove the United States from the underlying Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed by President George H.W. Bush and ratified by the Senate in 1992, Stavins said. That would remove this nation from the Paris Agreement in just a year. But there are serious questions with that approach regarding how the necessary legal steps and the political implications might play out.<\/p>\n<p>Stavins said that the simplest way to render U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement meaningless, however, would be to announce the country will not comply with the pact\u2019s carbon emission reductions \u2014 which are essentially voluntary. Obama set the reduction target at between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The international impact<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The loss of the U.S. leadership internationally on climate change could convince other nations not to honor their own commitments, and will \u201ccertainly not encourage greater action,\u201d Stavins said. But for those states committed to climate action, that wouldn\u2019t necessarily slow their progress.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.seas.harvard.edu\/directory\/mbm\">Mike McElroy<\/a>, the Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/chinaproject.harvard.edu\">Harvard China Project<\/a>, said China most likely will continue to reduce its emissions regardless of what the United States does, because Chinese action is driven in part by rampant air pollution that the nation\u2019s leadership has committed to address. The solutions there overlap with those for climate change.<\/p>\n<p>A hazard for U.S. industry, McElroy said, would be that, in addition to climate impact, the country likely would cede leadership in developing the energy technology of tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The future for coal<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whatever the eventual U.S. positions on climate and the environment, it will be tough for Trump to reverse the coal industry\u2019s decline, the experts said, even though he has been a dogged backer of coal\u2019s future. Market forces, not environmental regulation or political shifting, have hurt the industry most. Advances in fracking technology have brought vast new supplies of natural gas to the market, driving prices down and undercutting coal. In fact, Stavins said, Trump\u2019s pledged support for fracking could wind up hurting coal further.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Prospects for renewable power<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>At least in the short term, wind and solar power generation likely will be shielded by existing tax incentives and state renewable energy policies. The federal incentives extend to 2019 for wind and 2023 for solar. The state policies include requirements that a portion of electricity supply come from clean sources, ensuring continued demand: \u201cThere is a broad national consensus that renewable energy is an important investment for the country,\u201d McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, windy states in the middle of the country \u2014 from the Canadian border down to Texas \u2014 will likely support a continuation of the tax incentives into the future, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Regulation at lower government levels<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A shift in the federal government\u2019s stance on climate and energy also won\u2019t automatically reverse local, state, and regional action, McElroy said. California, with the nation\u2019s largest economy, has already adopted a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions and lower its carbon footprint.<\/p>\n<p>Cities are also taking steps to address climate change and have banded together to form a global climate action network, McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Environmental Protection Agency<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A likely target of the administration and Congress is the EPA, the federal agency charged with enforcing America\u2019s environmental laws. It is unlikely that the EPA would be abolished outright, since Senate Democrats have enough seats to block such a move through filibuster, according to Stavins and Freeman.<\/p>\n<p>But a lot of damage can be done by naming leaders antagonistic to the agency\u2019s mission and by starving it of funding, Schrag said. Trump has already named a climate change skeptic, Myron Ebell, to oversee the transition at EPA.<\/p>\n<p>Though attention is often focused on an agency\u2019s top leadership, Stavins pointed out that there are also hundreds of political appointees who will take important positions within the administration and influence its work over the next four years.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThat may be my greatest worry,\u201d Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Funding for climate science research<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Federal budgets have been tight for years, and funding constrained for all kinds of science. But if the new Congress adopts an anti-climate-change stance and seeks even deeper budget cuts, funding for climate research could be targeted, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p>If that\u2019s the case, Schrag said, there\u2019s an opportunity for institutions like Harvard to pick up the slack, as the University did in supporting stem cell research and establishing the Harvard Stem Cell Institute during the Bush administration.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re not there yet, but if President Trump chooses to slash NASA, NOAA, NSF budgets for climate research, I think there\u2019s an opportunity for universities like Harvard \u2026 to step up and say \u2018This is important to the world,\u2019\u201d Schrag said, referencing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation. \u201cObviously, we should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Other environmental regulations<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Another important area of influence, Freeman said, is in promulgating regulations.<\/p>\n<p>The administration has the power to review regulations that implement environmental laws, and can decide to rescind them, Freeman said. That power, however, isn\u2019t unfettered, as the administration has to justify its actions \u2014 in court if challenged \u2014 and must observe existing laws, even those that require it to issue environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cAnd there is no question that the rhetoric and politics of the next four years will not sound or feel anything like the eight years of the Obama administration, when climate change was at the very top of the domestic and international agenda. But while the environmental community should prepare for the worst, it should be open to the possibility that the most dire predictions may not come true, and help nudge the new president to a softer landing.\u201d<\/p>\n\r\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The uncertain future of energy and climate<\/h4><div class=\"soundbytes\"><iframe loading=\"lazy\" width=\"100%\" height=\"166\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"no\" src=\"https:\/\/w.soundcloud.com\/player\/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F293482822&amp;auto_play=false&amp;show_artwork=false&amp;color=A51C30\"><\/iframe><div class=\"soundbytes_content\"> Harvard Professor Michael McElroy discusses a world without fossil fuels, the economics of changing energy systems, and the impact President-elect Donald Trump may have on the future of energy and climate. <\/div><\/div>\r\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n\n\t\t","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":108352576,"featured_media":214227,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"gz_ga_pageviews":9,"gz_ga_lastupdated":"2018-03-23 03:09","document_color_palette":"crimson","author":"Alvin Powell","affiliation":"Harvard Staff Writer","_category_override":"","_yoast_wpseo_primary_category":"","_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1387],"tags":[8546,37245,12463,14655,37254],"gazette-formats":[],"series":[],"class_list":["post-214226","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-science-technology","tag-climate-change","tag-election-2016","tag-environment","tag-global-warming-2","tag-trump"],"yoast_head":"<!-- This site is optimized with the Yoast SEO Premium plugin v23.0 (Yoast SEO v27.1.1) - https:\/\/yoast.com\/product\/yoast-seo-premium-wordpress\/ -->\n<title>What\u2019s next for climate change policy &#8212; Harvard Gazette<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"What\u2019s next for climate change policy &#8212; Harvard Gazette\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"Harvard Gazette\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2016-11-15T17:49:19+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-03-04T22:44:09+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"605\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"403\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"gazettejohnbaglione\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"gazettejohnbaglione\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/person\/99782494e562769a740295b11ce6dafe\"},\"headline\":\"What\u2019s next for climate change policy\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-11-15T17:49:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T22:44:09+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\"},\"wordCount\":2006,\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"Climate Change\",\"election 2016\",\"Environments &amp; Sustainability\",\"Global Warming\",\"Trump\"],\"articleSection\":[\"Science &amp; Tech\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"copyrightYear\":\"2016\",\"copyrightHolder\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization\"}},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\",\"name\":\"What\u2019s next for climate change policy &#8212; Harvard Gazette\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-11-15T17:49:19+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T22:44:09+00:00\",\"description\":\"Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\",\"width\":605,\"height\":403},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/\",\"name\":\"Harvard Gazette\",\"description\":\"Official news from Harvard University covering innovation in teaching, learning, and research\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization\",\"name\":\"The Harvard Gazette\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Harvard_Gazette_logo.svg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Harvard_Gazette_logo.svg\",\"width\":164,\"height\":64,\"caption\":\"The Harvard Gazette\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"}},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/person\/99782494e562769a740295b11ce6dafe\",\"name\":\"gazettejohnbaglione\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy &#8212; Harvard Gazette","description":"Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy &#8212; Harvard Gazette","og_description":"Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.","og_url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","og_site_name":"Harvard Gazette","article_published_time":"2016-11-15T17:49:19+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-03-04T22:44:09+00:00","og_image":[{"width":605,"height":403,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"gazettejohnbaglione","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/"},"author":{"name":"gazettejohnbaglione","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/person\/99782494e562769a740295b11ce6dafe"},"headline":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy","datePublished":"2016-11-15T17:49:19+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T22:44:09+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/"},"wordCount":2006,"publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","keywords":["Climate Change","election 2016","Environments &amp; Sustainability","Global Warming","Trump"],"articleSection":["Science &amp; Tech"],"inLanguage":"en-US","copyrightYear":"2016","copyrightHolder":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization"}},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","name":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy &#8212; Harvard Gazette","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","datePublished":"2016-11-15T17:49:19+00:00","dateModified":"2019-03-04T22:44:09+00:00","description":"Harvard environmental experts looking ahead to a Trump administration see trouble for President Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan and U.S. international climate action, but add that the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle, and there may be hope for new approaches to addressing environmental ills.","inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","width":605,"height":403},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#website","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/","name":"Harvard Gazette","description":"Official news from Harvard University covering innovation in teaching, learning, and research","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#organization","name":"The Harvard Gazette","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Harvard_Gazette_logo.svg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Harvard_Gazette_logo.svg","width":164,"height":64,"caption":"The Harvard Gazette"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"}},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/#\/schema\/person\/99782494e562769a740295b11ce6dafe","name":"gazettejohnbaglione"}]}},"parsely":{"version":"1.1.0","canonical_url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","smart_links":{"inbound":0,"outbound":0},"traffic_boost_suggestions_count":0,"meta":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@type":"NewsArticle","headline":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/","mainEntityOfPage":{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/climate-future\/"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg?w=150","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg"},"articleSection":"Science &amp; Tech","author":[{"@type":"Person","name":"gazettejohnbaglione"}],"creator":["gazettejohnbaglione"],"publisher":{"@type":"Organization","name":"Harvard Gazette","logo":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/Harvard_Gazette_logo.svg"},"keywords":["climate change","election 2016","environments &amp; sustainability","global warming","trump"],"dateCreated":"2016-11-15T17:49:19Z","datePublished":"2016-11-15T17:49:19Z","dateModified":"2019-03-04T22:44:09Z"},"rendered":"<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"wp-parsely-metadata\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@type\":\"NewsArticle\",\"headline\":\"What\\u2019s next for climate change policy\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/news.harvard.edu\\\/gazette\\\/story\\\/2016\\\/11\\\/climate-future\\\/\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/news.harvard.edu\\\/gazette\\\/story\\\/2016\\\/11\\\/climate-future\\\/\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/news.harvard.edu\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2016\\\/11\\\/climate_4tych_605.jpg?w=150\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/news.harvard.edu\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2016\\\/11\\\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\"},\"articleSection\":\"Science &amp; Tech\",\"author\":[{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"name\":\"gazettejohnbaglione\"}],\"creator\":[\"gazettejohnbaglione\"],\"publisher\":{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"name\":\"Harvard Gazette\",\"logo\":\"https:\\\/\\\/news.harvard.edu\\\/gazette\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2023\\\/12\\\/Harvard_Gazette_logo.svg\"},\"keywords\":[\"climate change\",\"election 2016\",\"environments &amp; sustainability\",\"global warming\",\"trump\"],\"dateCreated\":\"2016-11-15T17:49:19Z\",\"datePublished\":\"2016-11-15T17:49:19Z\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-03-04T22:44:09Z\"}<\/script>","tracker_url":"https:\/\/cdn.parsely.com\/keys\/news.harvard.edu\/p.js"},"jetpack_featured_media_url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","has_blocks":true,"block_data":{"0":{"blockName":"harvard-gazette\/article-header","attrs":{"blockColorPalette":"","coloredHeading":"","creditText":"File photos by Kris Snibbe, Jon Chase\/Harvard Staff Photographers","displayDetails":"","displayTitle":"","categoryId":1387,"mediaAlt":"","mediaCaption":"Daniel Schrag (clockwise from top left), head of the Harvard University Center for the Environment; Jody Freeman, faculty director of Environmental Law Program at HLS; Robert Stavins, head of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements; and Mike McElroy, Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies, believe the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle. \u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. ","mediaId":214227,"mediaSize":"full","mediaType":"image","mediaUrl":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg","poster":"","title":"What\u2019s next for climate change policy","subheading":"A Trump administration can do plenty to undercut Obama\u2019s efforts, but it could compromise too, Harvard analysts say","centeredImage":true,"className":"is-style-full-width-text-below","mediaHeight":403,"mediaWidth":605,"backgroundFixed":false,"backgroundTone":"light","coloredBackground":false,"displayOverlay":true,"fadeInText":false,"isAmbient":false,"mediaLength":"","mediaPosition":"","posterText":"","titleAbove":false,"useUncroppedImage":false,"lock":[],"metadata":[]},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img alt=\"\" height=\"403\" loading=\"eager\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\" width=\"605\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><p class=\"wp-element-caption--caption\">Daniel Schrag (clockwise from top left), head of the Harvard University Center for the Environment; Jody Freeman, faculty director of Environmental Law Program at HLS; Robert Stavins, head of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements; and Mike McElroy, Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies, believe the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle. \u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. <\/p><p class=\"wp-element-caption--credit\">File photos by Kris Snibbe, Jon Chase\/Harvard Staff Photographers<\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n","innerContent":["<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img alt=\"\" height=\"403\" loading=\"eager\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\" width=\"605\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><p class=\"wp-element-caption--caption\">Daniel Schrag (clockwise from top left), head of the Harvard University Center for the Environment; Jody Freeman, faculty director of Environmental Law Program at HLS; Robert Stavins, head of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements; and Mike McElroy, Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies, believe the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle. \u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. <\/p><p class=\"wp-element-caption--credit\">File photos by Kris Snibbe, Jon Chase\/Harvard Staff Photographers<\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n"],"rendered":"<header\n\tclass=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-article-header alignfull article-header is-style-full-width-text-below centered-image\"\n\tstyle=\" \"\n>\n\t<figure class=\"wp-block-image\"><img alt=\"\" height=\"403\" loading=\"eager\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/climate_4tych_605.jpg\" width=\"605\"\/><figcaption class=\"wp-element-caption\"><p class=\"wp-element-caption--caption\">Daniel Schrag (clockwise from top left), head of the Harvard University Center for the Environment; Jody Freeman, faculty director of Environmental Law Program at HLS; Robert Stavins, head of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements; and Mike McElroy, Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies, believe the nation\u2019s environmental protection regulatory framework would be difficult to dismantle. \u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. <\/p><p class=\"wp-element-caption--credit\">File photos by Kris Snibbe, Jon Chase\/Harvard Staff Photographers<\/p><\/figcaption><\/figure>\n\n\t<div class=\"article-header__content\">\n\t\t\t<a\n\t\t\tclass=\"article-header__category\"\n\t\t\thref=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/science-technology\/\"\n\t\t>\n\t\t\tScience &amp; Tech\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\n\t\t<h1 class=\"article-header__title wp-block-heading \">\n\t\tWhat\u2019s next for climate change policy\t<\/h1>\n\n\t\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\n\t<div class=\"article-header__meta\">\n\t\t<div class=\"wp-block-post-author\">\n\t\t\t<address class=\"wp-block-post-author__content\">\n\t\t\t\t\t<p class=\"author wp-block-post-author__name\">\n\t\tAlvin Powell\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t<p class=\"wp-block-post-author__byline\">\n\t\t\tHarvard Staff Writer\t\t<\/p>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/address>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t\t<time class=\"article-header__date\" datetime=\"2016-11-15\">\n\t\t\tNovember 15, 2016\t\t<\/time>\n\n\t\t<span class=\"article-header__reading-time\">\n\t\t\tlong read\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/div>\n\n\t\n\t\t\t<h2 class=\"article-header__subheading wp-block-heading\">\n\t\t\tA Trump administration can do plenty to undercut Obama\u2019s efforts, but it could compromise too, Harvard analysts say\t\t<\/h2>\n\t\t\n<\/header>\n"},"2":{"blockName":"core\/group","attrs":{"templateLock":false,"metadata":{"name":"Article content"},"align":"wide","layout":{"type":"constrained","justifyContent":"center"},"tagName":"div","lock":[],"className":"","style":[],"backgroundColor":"","textColor":"","gradient":"","fontSize":"","fontFamily":"","borderColor":"","ariaLabel":"","anchor":""},"innerBlocks":[{"blockName":"core\/freeform","attrs":{"content":"","lock":[],"metadata":[]},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"\n\t\t","innerContent":["\n\t\t"],"rendered":"\n\t\t"},{"blockName":"harvard-gazette\/supporting-content","attrs":{"id":"6ac00169-8500-4459-ab30-66ccb559a05a","align":"left","allowedBlocks":[],"style":[],"lock":[],"metadata":[],"className":""},"innerBlocks":[{"blockName":"harvard-gazette\/featured-articles","attrs":{"autoGenerate":false,"className":"is-style-grid-list","inPostContent":true,"numberOfPosts":1,"postIds":[213625],"showExcerpt":false,"title":"More like this","category":"","carouselOnDesktop":false,"isEditor":false,"linkText":"See all book reviews","passPostIds":false,"postOverrides":[],"postTypeOverride":"post","receivePostIds":false,"series":"","showCategory":true,"showDate":true,"gridColumns":2,"showDropShadow":false,"showFormat":true,"showImage":true,"showImageZoom":false,"showSeries":true,"showReadMore":true,"showReadTime":true,"tags":[],"useCurrentTerm":false,"lock":[],"metadata":[],"align":"","style":[]},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"","innerContent":[],"rendered":"\n\t<div class=\"featured-articles is-post-type-post is-style-grid-list\"  style=\"\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h2 class=\"featured-articles__title wp-block-heading\">More like this<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t<ul class=\"featured-articles__list \">\n\t\t\n\t\t<li class=\"featured-article \">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<figure class=\"featured-article__image\">\n\t\t\t\t<img width=\"1200\" height=\"750\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/preselectrump_ap16314285296583_605.jpg?resize=1200%2C750\" class=\"attachment-large-landscape-desktop size-large-landscape-desktop\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" \/>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__content\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<a class=\"featured-article__category\" href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/\">\n\t\t\tNation &amp; World\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"featured-article__title wp-block-heading \"><a href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/with-president-trump-the-road-ahead\/\">For President Trump, the road ahead<\/a><\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<time class=\"featured-article__date\" datetime=\"2016-11-09\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tNovember 9, 2016\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/time>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span class=\"featured-article__reading-time\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tlong read\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/li>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t"}],"innerHTML":"<div class=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-supporting-content alignleft supporting-content\" id=\"supporting-content-6ac00169-8500-4459-ab30-66ccb559a05a\"><\/div>","innerContent":["<div class=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-supporting-content alignleft supporting-content\" id=\"supporting-content-6ac00169-8500-4459-ab30-66ccb559a05a\">","<\/div>"],"rendered":"<div class=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-supporting-content alignleft supporting-content\" id=\"supporting-content-6ac00169-8500-4459-ab30-66ccb559a05a\">\n\t<div class=\"featured-articles is-post-type-post is-style-grid-list\"  style=\"\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h2 class=\"featured-articles__title wp-block-heading\">More like this<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t<ul class=\"featured-articles__list \">\n\t\t\n\t\t<li class=\"featured-article \">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<figure class=\"featured-article__image\">\n\t\t\t\t<img width=\"1200\" height=\"750\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/preselectrump_ap16314285296583_605.jpg?resize=1200%2C750\" class=\"attachment-large-landscape-desktop size-large-landscape-desktop\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" \/>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__content\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<a class=\"featured-article__category\" href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/\">\n\t\t\tNation &amp; World\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"featured-article__title wp-block-heading \"><a href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/with-president-trump-the-road-ahead\/\">For President Trump, the road ahead<\/a><\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<time class=\"featured-article__date\" datetime=\"2016-11-09\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tNovember 9, 2016\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/time>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span class=\"featured-article__reading-time\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tlong read\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/li>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t<\/div>"},{"blockName":"core\/freeform","attrs":{"content":"","lock":[],"metadata":[]},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"\r\n<p>Regulations to fight climate change likely will be casualties of the incoming Trump administration, but environmental experts taking stock of the changing American political landscape said that work in the field will continue elsewhere and that a broad-based rollback of U.S. environmental protection will prove easier said than done.<\/p>\n<p>Though President-elect Donald Trump hasn\u2019t yet announced an environmental agenda, his campaign claim that climate change is an expensive hoax, his blanket support for the fossil fuel industry, and his criticism of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have environmentalists worried.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate, and they generally believe that environmental regulations can harm economic growth and improperly extend the reach of government. So environmentalists foresee a broad attack on the nation\u2019s framework of environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Still, Harvard environmental experts forecast a complex mosaic for the years ahead, one that has problems and likely is rife with litigation, but that also continues momentum toward a cleaner world because of a combination of market forces, economic factors, and continued efforts by other nations, states, and local governments.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTrump could unilaterally withdraw from the Paris Agreement, renouncing U.S. leadership on international climate negotiations. And he could try to rescind or weaken some important regulations, like the Clean Power Plan,\u201d said <a href=\"http:\/\/hls.harvard.edu\/faculty\/directory\/10285\/Freeman\">Jody Freeman<\/a>, the Archibald Cox Professor of Law and director of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.hls.harvard.edu\">Harvard Law School\u2019s<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.law.harvard.edu\/welcome\/\">Environmental Law Program<\/a>. \u201cBut any effort to fully unravel the substantial and meaningful regulatory initiatives of the last eight years will be long, complicated, and difficult, and in the end likely only partial because of the significant legal, political, and practical barriers to doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n\n<p>Federal environmental agencies likely are in for tough times, even without new laws being passed or existing ones repealed, the analysts said. The power to make political appointments and set budgets means an agency easily can be slowed by underfunding or new leadership hostile to its mission.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\/about\/faculty\/daniel-p-schrag\">Daniel Schrag<\/a>, the Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology, professor of environmental sciences and engineering, and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\">Harvard University Center for the Environment<\/a> said it\u2019s hard to project just what effect Trump\u2019s presidency will have on global climate efforts. The effects of climate change are so enormous that the actions of any one nation over four years will have limited impact.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s a long march to a low-carbon world,\u201d Schrag said. \u201cWe knew it wasn\u2019t going to be easy. Being successful means being able to weather setbacks like this one.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s even possible, he said, that a federal agenda the public sees as too hostile to climate change action could spark a backlash that leads to new reforms.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t know how you get from here to there,\u201d Schrag said. \u201c[But] there\u2019s always a path forward.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Freeman acknowledged there is a \u201clong list of worst-case scenarios\u201d but cautioned against taking campaign rhetoric at face value. It doesn\u2019t appear the president-elect has been fully briefed on climate science or fully considered the impact that withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change would have on our relationships with other nations, she said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe truth is, we don\u2019t entirely really know what President Trump will do on climate, energy, and environment,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cHis positions on other issues have changed, and that might happen here too. It is entirely possible that he will conclude that he can achieve his domestic energy agenda without jettisoning Paris, and he might even be persuaded that it makes more sense to embrace the international goal of emission reductions, but say he has a better way to get there than by Obama-style regulation. In other words, we must wait for the dust to settle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Here, then, is the tote board for what so far seems likeliest to happen on climate change issues:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Clean power and Paris<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The most probable casualties of the incoming administration are recent U.S. steps to fight climate change in the energy sector, and the United States\u2019 leadership in the international community on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan, which seeks to shift electricity generation in the United States away from polluting sources such as coal, is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If its decision supports the plan and is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, it would likely fail, since Trump has said he will appoint a conservative justice to fill the current high court vacancy.<\/p>\n<p>A simpler solution might be for the administration to withdraw the Clean Power Plan and replace it with a less-stringent version, which would be within the new president\u2019s power, Freeman said in an analysis of the environmental ramifications of a Trump presidency.<\/p>\n<p>Another probable target is the Paris Agreement, which Trump said he would cancel. While upending the entire agreement, negotiated by 195 countries, is beyond his power, Trump could withdraw the United States\u2019 participation. Since the agreement has taken effect, that process would take four years to accomplish, according to <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.harvard.edu\/stavins\/home\">Robert Stavins<\/a>, the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu\/project\/56\/harvard_project_on_climate_agreements.html\">Harvard Project on Climate Agreements<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, Trump also could submit the plan to the U.S. Senate to ratify, where it most likely would fail, Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p>The most dramatic option for a Trump administration would be to try to remove the United States from the underlying Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed by President George H.W. Bush and ratified by the Senate in 1992, Stavins said. That would remove this nation from the Paris Agreement in just a year. But there are serious questions with that approach regarding how the necessary legal steps and the political implications might play out.<\/p>\n<p>Stavins said that the simplest way to render U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement meaningless, however, would be to announce the country will not comply with the pact\u2019s carbon emission reductions \u2014 which are essentially voluntary. Obama set the reduction target at between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The international impact<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The loss of the U.S. leadership internationally on climate change could convince other nations not to honor their own commitments, and will \u201ccertainly not encourage greater action,\u201d Stavins said. But for those states committed to climate action, that wouldn\u2019t necessarily slow their progress.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.seas.harvard.edu\/directory\/mbm\">Mike McElroy<\/a>, the Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/chinaproject.harvard.edu\">Harvard China Project<\/a>, said China most likely will continue to reduce its emissions regardless of what the United States does, because Chinese action is driven in part by rampant air pollution that the nation\u2019s leadership has committed to address. The solutions there overlap with those for climate change.<\/p>\n<p>A hazard for U.S. industry, McElroy said, would be that, in addition to climate impact, the country likely would cede leadership in developing the energy technology of tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The future for coal<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whatever the eventual U.S. positions on climate and the environment, it will be tough for Trump to reverse the coal industry\u2019s decline, the experts said, even though he has been a dogged backer of coal\u2019s future. Market forces, not environmental regulation or political shifting, have hurt the industry most. Advances in fracking technology have brought vast new supplies of natural gas to the market, driving prices down and undercutting coal. In fact, Stavins said, Trump\u2019s pledged support for fracking could wind up hurting coal further.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Prospects for renewable power<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>At least in the short term, wind and solar power generation likely will be shielded by existing tax incentives and state renewable energy policies. The federal incentives extend to 2019 for wind and 2023 for solar. The state policies include requirements that a portion of electricity supply come from clean sources, ensuring continued demand: \u201cThere is a broad national consensus that renewable energy is an important investment for the country,\u201d McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, windy states in the middle of the country \u2014 from the Canadian border down to Texas \u2014 will likely support a continuation of the tax incentives into the future, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Regulation at lower government levels<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A shift in the federal government\u2019s stance on climate and energy also won\u2019t automatically reverse local, state, and regional action, McElroy said. California, with the nation\u2019s largest economy, has already adopted a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions and lower its carbon footprint.<\/p>\n<p>Cities are also taking steps to address climate change and have banded together to form a global climate action network, McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Environmental Protection Agency<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A likely target of the administration and Congress is the EPA, the federal agency charged with enforcing America\u2019s environmental laws. It is unlikely that the EPA would be abolished outright, since Senate Democrats have enough seats to block such a move through filibuster, according to Stavins and Freeman.<\/p>\n<p>But a lot of damage can be done by naming leaders antagonistic to the agency\u2019s mission and by starving it of funding, Schrag said. Trump has already named a climate change skeptic, Myron Ebell, to oversee the transition at EPA.<\/p>\n<p>Though attention is often focused on an agency\u2019s top leadership, Stavins pointed out that there are also hundreds of political appointees who will take important positions within the administration and influence its work over the next four years.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThat may be my greatest worry,\u201d Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Funding for climate science research<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Federal budgets have been tight for years, and funding constrained for all kinds of science. But if the new Congress adopts an anti-climate-change stance and seeks even deeper budget cuts, funding for climate research could be targeted, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p>If that\u2019s the case, Schrag said, there\u2019s an opportunity for institutions like Harvard to pick up the slack, as the University did in supporting stem cell research and establishing the Harvard Stem Cell Institute during the Bush administration.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re not there yet, but if President Trump chooses to slash NASA, NOAA, NSF budgets for climate research, I think there\u2019s an opportunity for universities like Harvard \u2026 to step up and say \u2018This is important to the world,\u2019\u201d Schrag said, referencing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation. \u201cObviously, we should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Other environmental regulations<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Another important area of influence, Freeman said, is in promulgating regulations.<\/p>\n<p>The administration has the power to review regulations that implement environmental laws, and can decide to rescind them, Freeman said. That power, however, isn\u2019t unfettered, as the administration has to justify its actions \u2014 in court if challenged \u2014 and must observe existing laws, even those that require it to issue environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cAnd there is no question that the rhetoric and politics of the next four years will not sound or feel anything like the eight years of the Obama administration, when climate change was at the very top of the domestic and international agenda. But while the environmental community should prepare for the worst, it should be open to the possibility that the most dire predictions may not come true, and help nudge the new president to a softer landing.\u201d<\/p>\n","innerContent":["\r\n<p>Regulations to fight climate change likely will be casualties of the incoming Trump administration, but environmental experts taking stock of the changing American political landscape said that work in the field will continue elsewhere and that a broad-based rollback of U.S. environmental protection will prove easier said than done.<\/p>\n<p>Though President-elect Donald Trump hasn\u2019t yet announced an environmental agenda, his campaign claim that climate change is an expensive hoax, his blanket support for the fossil fuel industry, and his criticism of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have environmentalists worried.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate, and they generally believe that environmental regulations can harm economic growth and improperly extend the reach of government. So environmentalists foresee a broad attack on the nation\u2019s framework of environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Still, Harvard environmental experts forecast a complex mosaic for the years ahead, one that has problems and likely is rife with litigation, but that also continues momentum toward a cleaner world because of a combination of market forces, economic factors, and continued efforts by other nations, states, and local governments.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTrump could unilaterally withdraw from the Paris Agreement, renouncing U.S. leadership on international climate negotiations. And he could try to rescind or weaken some important regulations, like the Clean Power Plan,\u201d said <a href=\"http:\/\/hls.harvard.edu\/faculty\/directory\/10285\/Freeman\">Jody Freeman<\/a>, the Archibald Cox Professor of Law and director of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.hls.harvard.edu\">Harvard Law School\u2019s<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.law.harvard.edu\/welcome\/\">Environmental Law Program<\/a>. \u201cBut any effort to fully unravel the substantial and meaningful regulatory initiatives of the last eight years will be long, complicated, and difficult, and in the end likely only partial because of the significant legal, political, and practical barriers to doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n\n<p>Federal environmental agencies likely are in for tough times, even without new laws being passed or existing ones repealed, the analysts said. The power to make political appointments and set budgets means an agency easily can be slowed by underfunding or new leadership hostile to its mission.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\/about\/faculty\/daniel-p-schrag\">Daniel Schrag<\/a>, the Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology, professor of environmental sciences and engineering, and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\">Harvard University Center for the Environment<\/a> said it\u2019s hard to project just what effect Trump\u2019s presidency will have on global climate efforts. The effects of climate change are so enormous that the actions of any one nation over four years will have limited impact.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s a long march to a low-carbon world,\u201d Schrag said. \u201cWe knew it wasn\u2019t going to be easy. Being successful means being able to weather setbacks like this one.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s even possible, he said, that a federal agenda the public sees as too hostile to climate change action could spark a backlash that leads to new reforms.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t know how you get from here to there,\u201d Schrag said. \u201c[But] there\u2019s always a path forward.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Freeman acknowledged there is a \u201clong list of worst-case scenarios\u201d but cautioned against taking campaign rhetoric at face value. It doesn\u2019t appear the president-elect has been fully briefed on climate science or fully considered the impact that withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change would have on our relationships with other nations, she said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe truth is, we don\u2019t entirely really know what President Trump will do on climate, energy, and environment,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cHis positions on other issues have changed, and that might happen here too. It is entirely possible that he will conclude that he can achieve his domestic energy agenda without jettisoning Paris, and he might even be persuaded that it makes more sense to embrace the international goal of emission reductions, but say he has a better way to get there than by Obama-style regulation. In other words, we must wait for the dust to settle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Here, then, is the tote board for what so far seems likeliest to happen on climate change issues:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Clean power and Paris<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The most probable casualties of the incoming administration are recent U.S. steps to fight climate change in the energy sector, and the United States\u2019 leadership in the international community on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan, which seeks to shift electricity generation in the United States away from polluting sources such as coal, is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If its decision supports the plan and is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, it would likely fail, since Trump has said he will appoint a conservative justice to fill the current high court vacancy.<\/p>\n<p>A simpler solution might be for the administration to withdraw the Clean Power Plan and replace it with a less-stringent version, which would be within the new president\u2019s power, Freeman said in an analysis of the environmental ramifications of a Trump presidency.<\/p>\n<p>Another probable target is the Paris Agreement, which Trump said he would cancel. While upending the entire agreement, negotiated by 195 countries, is beyond his power, Trump could withdraw the United States\u2019 participation. Since the agreement has taken effect, that process would take four years to accomplish, according to <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.harvard.edu\/stavins\/home\">Robert Stavins<\/a>, the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu\/project\/56\/harvard_project_on_climate_agreements.html\">Harvard Project on Climate Agreements<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, Trump also could submit the plan to the U.S. Senate to ratify, where it most likely would fail, Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p>The most dramatic option for a Trump administration would be to try to remove the United States from the underlying Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed by President George H.W. Bush and ratified by the Senate in 1992, Stavins said. That would remove this nation from the Paris Agreement in just a year. But there are serious questions with that approach regarding how the necessary legal steps and the political implications might play out.<\/p>\n<p>Stavins said that the simplest way to render U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement meaningless, however, would be to announce the country will not comply with the pact\u2019s carbon emission reductions \u2014 which are essentially voluntary. Obama set the reduction target at between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The international impact<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The loss of the U.S. leadership internationally on climate change could convince other nations not to honor their own commitments, and will \u201ccertainly not encourage greater action,\u201d Stavins said. But for those states committed to climate action, that wouldn\u2019t necessarily slow their progress.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.seas.harvard.edu\/directory\/mbm\">Mike McElroy<\/a>, the Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/chinaproject.harvard.edu\">Harvard China Project<\/a>, said China most likely will continue to reduce its emissions regardless of what the United States does, because Chinese action is driven in part by rampant air pollution that the nation\u2019s leadership has committed to address. The solutions there overlap with those for climate change.<\/p>\n<p>A hazard for U.S. industry, McElroy said, would be that, in addition to climate impact, the country likely would cede leadership in developing the energy technology of tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The future for coal<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whatever the eventual U.S. positions on climate and the environment, it will be tough for Trump to reverse the coal industry\u2019s decline, the experts said, even though he has been a dogged backer of coal\u2019s future. Market forces, not environmental regulation or political shifting, have hurt the industry most. Advances in fracking technology have brought vast new supplies of natural gas to the market, driving prices down and undercutting coal. In fact, Stavins said, Trump\u2019s pledged support for fracking could wind up hurting coal further.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Prospects for renewable power<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>At least in the short term, wind and solar power generation likely will be shielded by existing tax incentives and state renewable energy policies. The federal incentives extend to 2019 for wind and 2023 for solar. The state policies include requirements that a portion of electricity supply come from clean sources, ensuring continued demand: \u201cThere is a broad national consensus that renewable energy is an important investment for the country,\u201d McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, windy states in the middle of the country \u2014 from the Canadian border down to Texas \u2014 will likely support a continuation of the tax incentives into the future, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Regulation at lower government levels<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A shift in the federal government\u2019s stance on climate and energy also won\u2019t automatically reverse local, state, and regional action, McElroy said. California, with the nation\u2019s largest economy, has already adopted a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions and lower its carbon footprint.<\/p>\n<p>Cities are also taking steps to address climate change and have banded together to form a global climate action network, McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Environmental Protection Agency<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A likely target of the administration and Congress is the EPA, the federal agency charged with enforcing America\u2019s environmental laws. It is unlikely that the EPA would be abolished outright, since Senate Democrats have enough seats to block such a move through filibuster, according to Stavins and Freeman.<\/p>\n<p>But a lot of damage can be done by naming leaders antagonistic to the agency\u2019s mission and by starving it of funding, Schrag said. Trump has already named a climate change skeptic, Myron Ebell, to oversee the transition at EPA.<\/p>\n<p>Though attention is often focused on an agency\u2019s top leadership, Stavins pointed out that there are also hundreds of political appointees who will take important positions within the administration and influence its work over the next four years.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThat may be my greatest worry,\u201d Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Funding for climate science research<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Federal budgets have been tight for years, and funding constrained for all kinds of science. But if the new Congress adopts an anti-climate-change stance and seeks even deeper budget cuts, funding for climate research could be targeted, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p>If that\u2019s the case, Schrag said, there\u2019s an opportunity for institutions like Harvard to pick up the slack, as the University did in supporting stem cell research and establishing the Harvard Stem Cell Institute during the Bush administration.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re not there yet, but if President Trump chooses to slash NASA, NOAA, NSF budgets for climate research, I think there\u2019s an opportunity for universities like Harvard \u2026 to step up and say \u2018This is important to the world,\u2019\u201d Schrag said, referencing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation. \u201cObviously, we should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Other environmental regulations<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Another important area of influence, Freeman said, is in promulgating regulations.<\/p>\n<p>The administration has the power to review regulations that implement environmental laws, and can decide to rescind them, Freeman said. That power, however, isn\u2019t unfettered, as the administration has to justify its actions \u2014 in court if challenged \u2014 and must observe existing laws, even those that require it to issue environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cAnd there is no question that the rhetoric and politics of the next four years will not sound or feel anything like the eight years of the Obama administration, when climate change was at the very top of the domestic and international agenda. But while the environmental community should prepare for the worst, it should be open to the possibility that the most dire predictions may not come true, and help nudge the new president to a softer landing.\u201d<\/p>\n"],"rendered":"\r\n<p>Regulations to fight climate change likely will be casualties of the incoming Trump administration, but environmental experts taking stock of the changing American political landscape said that work in the field will continue elsewhere and that a broad-based rollback of U.S. environmental protection will prove easier said than done.<\/p>\n<p>Though President-elect Donald Trump hasn\u2019t yet announced an environmental agenda, his campaign claim that climate change is an expensive hoax, his blanket support for the fossil fuel industry, and his criticism of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have environmentalists worried.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate, and they generally believe that environmental regulations can harm economic growth and improperly extend the reach of government. So environmentalists foresee a broad attack on the nation\u2019s framework of environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Still, Harvard environmental experts forecast a complex mosaic for the years ahead, one that has problems and likely is rife with litigation, but that also continues momentum toward a cleaner world because of a combination of market forces, economic factors, and continued efforts by other nations, states, and local governments.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTrump could unilaterally withdraw from the Paris Agreement, renouncing U.S. leadership on international climate negotiations. And he could try to rescind or weaken some important regulations, like the Clean Power Plan,\u201d said <a href=\"http:\/\/hls.harvard.edu\/faculty\/directory\/10285\/Freeman\">Jody Freeman<\/a>, the Archibald Cox Professor of Law and director of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.hls.harvard.edu\">Harvard Law School\u2019s<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.law.harvard.edu\/welcome\/\">Environmental Law Program<\/a>. \u201cBut any effort to fully unravel the substantial and meaningful regulatory initiatives of the last eight years will be long, complicated, and difficult, and in the end likely only partial because of the significant legal, political, and practical barriers to doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n\n<p>Federal environmental agencies likely are in for tough times, even without new laws being passed or existing ones repealed, the analysts said. The power to make political appointments and set budgets means an agency easily can be slowed by underfunding or new leadership hostile to its mission.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\/about\/faculty\/daniel-p-schrag\">Daniel Schrag<\/a>, the Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology, professor of environmental sciences and engineering, and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\">Harvard University Center for the Environment<\/a> said it\u2019s hard to project just what effect Trump\u2019s presidency will have on global climate efforts. The effects of climate change are so enormous that the actions of any one nation over four years will have limited impact.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s a long march to a low-carbon world,\u201d Schrag said. \u201cWe knew it wasn\u2019t going to be easy. Being successful means being able to weather setbacks like this one.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s even possible, he said, that a federal agenda the public sees as too hostile to climate change action could spark a backlash that leads to new reforms.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t know how you get from here to there,\u201d Schrag said. \u201c[But] there\u2019s always a path forward.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Freeman acknowledged there is a \u201clong list of worst-case scenarios\u201d but cautioned against taking campaign rhetoric at face value. It doesn\u2019t appear the president-elect has been fully briefed on climate science or fully considered the impact that withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change would have on our relationships with other nations, she said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe truth is, we don\u2019t entirely really know what President Trump will do on climate, energy, and environment,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cHis positions on other issues have changed, and that might happen here too. It is entirely possible that he will conclude that he can achieve his domestic energy agenda without jettisoning Paris, and he might even be persuaded that it makes more sense to embrace the international goal of emission reductions, but say he has a better way to get there than by Obama-style regulation. In other words, we must wait for the dust to settle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Here, then, is the tote board for what so far seems likeliest to happen on climate change issues:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Clean power and Paris<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The most probable casualties of the incoming administration are recent U.S. steps to fight climate change in the energy sector, and the United States\u2019 leadership in the international community on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan, which seeks to shift electricity generation in the United States away from polluting sources such as coal, is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If its decision supports the plan and is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, it would likely fail, since Trump has said he will appoint a conservative justice to fill the current high court vacancy.<\/p>\n<p>A simpler solution might be for the administration to withdraw the Clean Power Plan and replace it with a less-stringent version, which would be within the new president\u2019s power, Freeman said in an analysis of the environmental ramifications of a Trump presidency.<\/p>\n<p>Another probable target is the Paris Agreement, which Trump said he would cancel. While upending the entire agreement, negotiated by 195 countries, is beyond his power, Trump could withdraw the United States\u2019 participation. Since the agreement has taken effect, that process would take four years to accomplish, according to <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.harvard.edu\/stavins\/home\">Robert Stavins<\/a>, the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu\/project\/56\/harvard_project_on_climate_agreements.html\">Harvard Project on Climate Agreements<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, Trump also could submit the plan to the U.S. Senate to ratify, where it most likely would fail, Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p>The most dramatic option for a Trump administration would be to try to remove the United States from the underlying Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed by President George H.W. Bush and ratified by the Senate in 1992, Stavins said. That would remove this nation from the Paris Agreement in just a year. But there are serious questions with that approach regarding how the necessary legal steps and the political implications might play out.<\/p>\n<p>Stavins said that the simplest way to render U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement meaningless, however, would be to announce the country will not comply with the pact\u2019s carbon emission reductions \u2014 which are essentially voluntary. Obama set the reduction target at between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The international impact<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The loss of the U.S. leadership internationally on climate change could convince other nations not to honor their own commitments, and will \u201ccertainly not encourage greater action,\u201d Stavins said. But for those states committed to climate action, that wouldn\u2019t necessarily slow their progress.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.seas.harvard.edu\/directory\/mbm\">Mike McElroy<\/a>, the Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/chinaproject.harvard.edu\">Harvard China Project<\/a>, said China most likely will continue to reduce its emissions regardless of what the United States does, because Chinese action is driven in part by rampant air pollution that the nation\u2019s leadership has committed to address. The solutions there overlap with those for climate change.<\/p>\n<p>A hazard for U.S. industry, McElroy said, would be that, in addition to climate impact, the country likely would cede leadership in developing the energy technology of tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The future for coal<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whatever the eventual U.S. positions on climate and the environment, it will be tough for Trump to reverse the coal industry\u2019s decline, the experts said, even though he has been a dogged backer of coal\u2019s future. Market forces, not environmental regulation or political shifting, have hurt the industry most. Advances in fracking technology have brought vast new supplies of natural gas to the market, driving prices down and undercutting coal. In fact, Stavins said, Trump\u2019s pledged support for fracking could wind up hurting coal further.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Prospects for renewable power<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>At least in the short term, wind and solar power generation likely will be shielded by existing tax incentives and state renewable energy policies. The federal incentives extend to 2019 for wind and 2023 for solar. The state policies include requirements that a portion of electricity supply come from clean sources, ensuring continued demand: \u201cThere is a broad national consensus that renewable energy is an important investment for the country,\u201d McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, windy states in the middle of the country \u2014 from the Canadian border down to Texas \u2014 will likely support a continuation of the tax incentives into the future, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Regulation at lower government levels<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A shift in the federal government\u2019s stance on climate and energy also won\u2019t automatically reverse local, state, and regional action, McElroy said. California, with the nation\u2019s largest economy, has already adopted a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions and lower its carbon footprint.<\/p>\n<p>Cities are also taking steps to address climate change and have banded together to form a global climate action network, McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Environmental Protection Agency<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A likely target of the administration and Congress is the EPA, the federal agency charged with enforcing America\u2019s environmental laws. It is unlikely that the EPA would be abolished outright, since Senate Democrats have enough seats to block such a move through filibuster, according to Stavins and Freeman.<\/p>\n<p>But a lot of damage can be done by naming leaders antagonistic to the agency\u2019s mission and by starving it of funding, Schrag said. Trump has already named a climate change skeptic, Myron Ebell, to oversee the transition at EPA.<\/p>\n<p>Though attention is often focused on an agency\u2019s top leadership, Stavins pointed out that there are also hundreds of political appointees who will take important positions within the administration and influence its work over the next four years.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThat may be my greatest worry,\u201d Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Funding for climate science research<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Federal budgets have been tight for years, and funding constrained for all kinds of science. But if the new Congress adopts an anti-climate-change stance and seeks even deeper budget cuts, funding for climate research could be targeted, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p>If that\u2019s the case, Schrag said, there\u2019s an opportunity for institutions like Harvard to pick up the slack, as the University did in supporting stem cell research and establishing the Harvard Stem Cell Institute during the Bush administration.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re not there yet, but if President Trump chooses to slash NASA, NOAA, NSF budgets for climate research, I think there\u2019s an opportunity for universities like Harvard \u2026 to step up and say \u2018This is important to the world,\u2019\u201d Schrag said, referencing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation. \u201cObviously, we should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Other environmental regulations<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Another important area of influence, Freeman said, is in promulgating regulations.<\/p>\n<p>The administration has the power to review regulations that implement environmental laws, and can decide to rescind them, Freeman said. That power, however, isn\u2019t unfettered, as the administration has to justify its actions \u2014 in court if challenged \u2014 and must observe existing laws, even those that require it to issue environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cAnd there is no question that the rhetoric and politics of the next four years will not sound or feel anything like the eight years of the Obama administration, when climate change was at the very top of the domestic and international agenda. But while the environmental community should prepare for the worst, it should be open to the possibility that the most dire predictions may not come true, and help nudge the new president to a softer landing.\u201d<\/p>\n"},{"blockName":"core\/heading","attrs":{"headingLevel":4,"textAlign":"","content":"The uncertain future of energy and climate","level":2,"levelOptions":[],"placeholder":"","lock":[],"metadata":[],"align":"","className":"","style":[],"backgroundColor":"","textColor":"","gradient":"","fontSize":"","fontFamily":"","borderColor":"","anchor":""},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The uncertain future of energy and climate<\/h4>","innerContent":["<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The uncertain future of energy and climate<\/h4>"],"rendered":"<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The uncertain future of energy and climate<\/h4>"},{"blockName":"core\/html","attrs":{"content":"","lock":[],"metadata":[]},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"<div class=\"soundbytes\"><iframe width=\"100%\" height=\"166\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"no\" src=\"https:\/\/w.soundcloud.com\/player\/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F293482822&amp;auto_play=false&amp;show_artwork=false&amp;color=A51C30\"><\/iframe><div class=\"soundbytes_content\"> Harvard Professor Michael McElroy discusses a world without fossil fuels, the economics of changing energy systems, and the impact President-elect Donald Trump may have on the future of energy and climate. <\/div><\/div>","innerContent":["<div class=\"soundbytes\"><iframe width=\"100%\" height=\"166\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"no\" src=\"https:\/\/w.soundcloud.com\/player\/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F293482822&amp;auto_play=false&amp;show_artwork=false&amp;color=A51C30\"><\/iframe><div class=\"soundbytes_content\"> Harvard Professor Michael McElroy discusses a world without fossil fuels, the economics of changing energy systems, and the impact President-elect Donald Trump may have on the future of energy and climate. <\/div><\/div>"],"rendered":"<div class=\"soundbytes\"><iframe width=\"100%\" height=\"166\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"no\" src=\"https:\/\/w.soundcloud.com\/player\/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F293482822&amp;auto_play=false&amp;show_artwork=false&amp;color=A51C30\"><\/iframe><div class=\"soundbytes_content\"> Harvard Professor Michael McElroy discusses a world without fossil fuels, the economics of changing energy systems, and the impact President-elect Donald Trump may have on the future of energy and climate. <\/div><\/div>"},{"blockName":"core\/freeform","attrs":{"content":"","lock":[],"metadata":[]},"innerBlocks":[],"innerHTML":"\n","innerContent":["\n"],"rendered":"\n"}],"innerHTML":"\n<div class=\"wp-block-group alignwide\">\n\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\r\n\n\n<\/div>\n","innerContent":["\n<div class=\"wp-block-group alignwide\">\n\n","\r\n","\r\n","\r\n","\r\n","\n\n<\/div>\n"],"rendered":"\n<div class=\"wp-block-group alignwide has-global-padding is-content-justification-center is-layout-constrained wp-block-group-is-layout-constrained\">\n\n\n\t\t\r\n<div class=\"wp-block-harvard-gazette-supporting-content alignleft supporting-content\" id=\"supporting-content-6ac00169-8500-4459-ab30-66ccb559a05a\">\n\t<div class=\"featured-articles is-post-type-post is-style-grid-list\"  style=\"\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<h2 class=\"featured-articles__title wp-block-heading\">More like this<\/h2>\n\t\t\t\t<ul class=\"featured-articles__list \">\n\t\t\n\t\t<li class=\"featured-article \">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<figure class=\"featured-article__image\">\n\t\t\t\t<img width=\"1200\" height=\"750\" src=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/preselectrump_ap16314285296583_605.jpg?resize=1200%2C750\" class=\"attachment-large-landscape-desktop size-large-landscape-desktop\" alt=\"\" loading=\"lazy\" \/>\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/figure>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__content\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<a class=\"featured-article__category\" href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/\">\n\t\t\tNation &amp; World\t\t<\/a>\n\t\t\n\t\t\t\t<h3 class=\"featured-article__title wp-block-heading \"><a href=\"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/with-president-trump-the-road-ahead\/\">For President Trump, the road ahead<\/a><\/h3>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<div class=\"featured-article__meta\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<time class=\"featured-article__date\" datetime=\"2016-11-09\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tNovember 9, 2016\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/time>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<span class=\"featured-article__reading-time\">\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tlong read\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/div>\n\t\t<\/li>\n\n\t\t\t\t<\/ul>\n\t\t\t<\/div>\n\n\t<\/div>\r\n\r\n<p>Regulations to fight climate change likely will be casualties of the incoming Trump administration, but environmental experts taking stock of the changing American political landscape said that work in the field will continue elsewhere and that a broad-based rollback of U.S. environmental protection will prove easier said than done.<\/p>\n<p>Though President-elect Donald Trump hasn\u2019t yet announced an environmental agenda, his campaign claim that climate change is an expensive hoax, his blanket support for the fossil fuel industry, and his criticism of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) have environmentalists worried.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, Republicans have majorities in the House and Senate, and they generally believe that environmental regulations can harm economic growth and improperly extend the reach of government. So environmentalists foresee a broad attack on the nation\u2019s framework of environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>Still, Harvard environmental experts forecast a complex mosaic for the years ahead, one that has problems and likely is rife with litigation, but that also continues momentum toward a cleaner world because of a combination of market forces, economic factors, and continued efforts by other nations, states, and local governments.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cTrump could unilaterally withdraw from the Paris Agreement, renouncing U.S. leadership on international climate negotiations. And he could try to rescind or weaken some important regulations, like the Clean Power Plan,\u201d said <a href=\"http:\/\/hls.harvard.edu\/faculty\/directory\/10285\/Freeman\">Jody Freeman<\/a>, the Archibald Cox Professor of Law and director of <a href=\"http:\/\/www.hls.harvard.edu\">Harvard Law School\u2019s<\/a> <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.law.harvard.edu\/welcome\/\">Environmental Law Program<\/a>. \u201cBut any effort to fully unravel the substantial and meaningful regulatory initiatives of the last eight years will be long, complicated, and difficult, and in the end likely only partial because of the significant legal, political, and practical barriers to doing so.\u201d<\/p>\n\n<p>Federal environmental agencies likely are in for tough times, even without new laws being passed or existing ones repealed, the analysts said. The power to make political appointments and set budgets means an agency easily can be slowed by underfunding or new leadership hostile to its mission.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\/about\/faculty\/daniel-p-schrag\">Daniel Schrag<\/a>, the Sturgis Hooper Professor of Geology, professor of environmental sciences and engineering, and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/environment.harvard.edu\">Harvard University Center for the Environment<\/a> said it\u2019s hard to project just what effect Trump\u2019s presidency will have on global climate efforts. The effects of climate change are so enormous that the actions of any one nation over four years will have limited impact.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cIt\u2019s a long march to a low-carbon world,\u201d Schrag said. \u201cWe knew it wasn\u2019t going to be easy. Being successful means being able to weather setbacks like this one.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>It\u2019s even possible, he said, that a federal agenda the public sees as too hostile to climate change action could spark a backlash that leads to new reforms.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cI don\u2019t know how you get from here to there,\u201d Schrag said. \u201c[But] there\u2019s always a path forward.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Freeman acknowledged there is a \u201clong list of worst-case scenarios\u201d but cautioned against taking campaign rhetoric at face value. It doesn\u2019t appear the president-elect has been fully briefed on climate science or fully considered the impact that withdrawing from the Paris Agreement on climate change would have on our relationships with other nations, she said.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe truth is, we don\u2019t entirely really know what President Trump will do on climate, energy, and environment,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cHis positions on other issues have changed, and that might happen here too. It is entirely possible that he will conclude that he can achieve his domestic energy agenda without jettisoning Paris, and he might even be persuaded that it makes more sense to embrace the international goal of emission reductions, but say he has a better way to get there than by Obama-style regulation. In other words, we must wait for the dust to settle.\u201d<\/p>\n<p>Here, then, is the tote board for what so far seems likeliest to happen on climate change issues:<\/p>\n<p><strong>Clean power and Paris<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The most probable casualties of the incoming administration are recent U.S. steps to fight climate change in the energy sector, and the United States\u2019 leadership in the international community on the issue.<\/p>\n<p>Obama\u2019s Clean Power Plan, which seeks to shift electricity generation in the United States away from polluting sources such as coal, is currently being reviewed by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit. If its decision supports the plan and is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, it would likely fail, since Trump has said he will appoint a conservative justice to fill the current high court vacancy.<\/p>\n<p>A simpler solution might be for the administration to withdraw the Clean Power Plan and replace it with a less-stringent version, which would be within the new president\u2019s power, Freeman said in an analysis of the environmental ramifications of a Trump presidency.<\/p>\n<p>Another probable target is the Paris Agreement, which Trump said he would cancel. While upending the entire agreement, negotiated by 195 countries, is beyond his power, Trump could withdraw the United States\u2019 participation. Since the agreement has taken effect, that process would take four years to accomplish, according to <a href=\"http:\/\/scholar.harvard.edu\/stavins\/home\">Robert Stavins<\/a>, the Albert Pratt Professor of Business and Government and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/belfercenter.ksg.harvard.edu\/project\/56\/harvard_project_on_climate_agreements.html\">Harvard Project on Climate Agreements<\/a>.<\/p>\n<p>Alternatively, Trump also could submit the plan to the U.S. Senate to ratify, where it most likely would fail, Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p>The most dramatic option for a Trump administration would be to try to remove the United States from the underlying Framework Convention on Climate Change, signed by President George H.W. Bush and ratified by the Senate in 1992, Stavins said. That would remove this nation from the Paris Agreement in just a year. But there are serious questions with that approach regarding how the necessary legal steps and the political implications might play out.<\/p>\n<p>Stavins said that the simplest way to render U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement meaningless, however, would be to announce the country will not comply with the pact\u2019s carbon emission reductions \u2014 which are essentially voluntary. Obama set the reduction target at between 26 and 28 percent below 2005 levels by 2025.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The international impact<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>The loss of the U.S. leadership internationally on climate change could convince other nations not to honor their own commitments, and will \u201ccertainly not encourage greater action,\u201d Stavins said. But for those states committed to climate action, that wouldn\u2019t necessarily slow their progress.<\/p>\n<p><a href=\"https:\/\/www.seas.harvard.edu\/directory\/mbm\">Mike McElroy<\/a>, the Gilbert Butler Professor of Environmental Studies and head of the <a href=\"http:\/\/chinaproject.harvard.edu\">Harvard China Project<\/a>, said China most likely will continue to reduce its emissions regardless of what the United States does, because Chinese action is driven in part by rampant air pollution that the nation\u2019s leadership has committed to address. The solutions there overlap with those for climate change.<\/p>\n<p>A hazard for U.S. industry, McElroy said, would be that, in addition to climate impact, the country likely would cede leadership in developing the energy technology of tomorrow.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The future for coal<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Whatever the eventual U.S. positions on climate and the environment, it will be tough for Trump to reverse the coal industry\u2019s decline, the experts said, even though he has been a dogged backer of coal\u2019s future. Market forces, not environmental regulation or political shifting, have hurt the industry most. Advances in fracking technology have brought vast new supplies of natural gas to the market, driving prices down and undercutting coal. In fact, Stavins said, Trump\u2019s pledged support for fracking could wind up hurting coal further.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Prospects for renewable power<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>At least in the short term, wind and solar power generation likely will be shielded by existing tax incentives and state renewable energy policies. The federal incentives extend to 2019 for wind and 2023 for solar. The state policies include requirements that a portion of electricity supply come from clean sources, ensuring continued demand: \u201cThere is a broad national consensus that renewable energy is an important investment for the country,\u201d McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p>In addition, windy states in the middle of the country \u2014 from the Canadian border down to Texas \u2014 will likely support a continuation of the tax incentives into the future, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Regulation at lower government levels<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A shift in the federal government\u2019s stance on climate and energy also won\u2019t automatically reverse local, state, and regional action, McElroy said. California, with the nation\u2019s largest economy, has already adopted a cap-and-trade system to reduce carbon emissions and lower its carbon footprint.<\/p>\n<p>Cities are also taking steps to address climate change and have banded together to form a global climate action network, McElroy said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>The Environmental Protection Agency<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>A likely target of the administration and Congress is the EPA, the federal agency charged with enforcing America\u2019s environmental laws. It is unlikely that the EPA would be abolished outright, since Senate Democrats have enough seats to block such a move through filibuster, according to Stavins and Freeman.<\/p>\n<p>But a lot of damage can be done by naming leaders antagonistic to the agency\u2019s mission and by starving it of funding, Schrag said. Trump has already named a climate change skeptic, Myron Ebell, to oversee the transition at EPA.<\/p>\n<p>Though attention is often focused on an agency\u2019s top leadership, Stavins pointed out that there are also hundreds of political appointees who will take important positions within the administration and influence its work over the next four years.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThat may be my greatest worry,\u201d Stavins said.<\/p>\n<p><strong>Funding for climate science research<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Federal budgets have been tight for years, and funding constrained for all kinds of science. But if the new Congress adopts an anti-climate-change stance and seeks even deeper budget cuts, funding for climate research could be targeted, Schrag said.<\/p>\n<p>If that\u2019s the case, Schrag said, there\u2019s an opportunity for institutions like Harvard to pick up the slack, as the University did in supporting stem cell research and establishing the Harvard Stem Cell Institute during the Bush administration.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cWe\u2019re not there yet, but if President Trump chooses to slash NASA, NOAA, NSF budgets for climate research, I think there\u2019s an opportunity for universities like Harvard \u2026 to step up and say \u2018This is important to the world,\u2019\u201d Schrag said, referencing the National Aeronautics and Space Administration, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, and the National Science Foundation. \u201cObviously, we should hope for the best, but prepare for the worst.\u201d<\/p>\n<p><strong>Other environmental regulations<\/strong><\/p>\n<p>Another important area of influence, Freeman said, is in promulgating regulations.<\/p>\n<p>The administration has the power to review regulations that implement environmental laws, and can decide to rescind them, Freeman said. That power, however, isn\u2019t unfettered, as the administration has to justify its actions \u2014 in court if challenged \u2014 and must observe existing laws, even those that require it to issue environmental regulations.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThere is no question that there will be a regulatory rollback, but its scope is still unknown,\u201d Freeman said. \u201cAnd there is no question that the rhetoric and politics of the next four years will not sound or feel anything like the eight years of the Obama administration, when climate change was at the very top of the domestic and international agenda. But while the environmental community should prepare for the worst, it should be open to the possibility that the most dire predictions may not come true, and help nudge the new president to a softer landing.\u201d<\/p>\n\r\n<h4 class=\"wp-block-heading\">The uncertain future of energy and climate<\/h4><div class=\"soundbytes\"><iframe width=\"100%\" height=\"166\" scrolling=\"no\" frameborder=\"no\" src=\"https:\/\/w.soundcloud.com\/player\/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fapi.soundcloud.com%2Ftracks%2F293482822&amp;auto_play=false&amp;show_artwork=false&amp;color=A51C30\"><\/iframe><div class=\"soundbytes_content\"> Harvard Professor Michael McElroy discusses a world without fossil fuels, the economics of changing energy systems, and the impact President-elect Donald Trump may have on the future of energy and climate. <\/div><\/div>\r\n\n\n\n<\/div>\n"}},"jetpack-related-posts":[{"id":324155,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2021\/04\/bidens-reversal-of-trumps-environmental-legacy-swift-far-reaching\/","url_meta":{"origin":214226,"position":0},"title":"Biden\u2019s reversal of Trump\u2019s environmental legacy swift, far-reaching","author":"gazettebeckycoleman","date":"April 9, 2021","format":false,"excerpt":"The Biden administration\u2019s actions on the environment have been fast and broad, reversing many anti-environmental policies of the prior administration, despite being limited in many cases to executive action and targeted spending due to Congressional Republican opposition.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Nation &amp; World&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Nation &amp; World","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"President Biden.","src":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/AP_Biden.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/AP_Biden.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/AP_Biden.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2021\/04\/AP_Biden.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":220690,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2017\/02\/what-to-expect-from-pruitts-epa\/","url_meta":{"origin":214226,"position":1},"title":"What to expect from Pruitt\u2019s EPA","author":"gazettejohnbaglione","date":"February 17, 2017","format":false,"excerpt":"The Gazette speaks to Robert Stavins, director of the Harvard Project on Climate Agreements and a past member of the EPA\u2019s Science Advisory Board, about the future of the EPA under the leadership of Scott Pruitt.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Science &amp; Tech&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Science &amp; Tech","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/science-technology\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/scott_pruitt_605.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/scott_pruitt_605.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2017\/02\/scott_pruitt_605.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":406396,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2025\/04\/epa-plans-target-climate-change-initiatives\/","url_meta":{"origin":214226,"position":2},"title":"EPA plans target climate change initiatives","author":"Terry Murphy","date":"April 14, 2025","format":false,"excerpt":"Environmental law experts say rollbacks will reverse advances in recent decades","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Nation &amp; World&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Nation &amp; World","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Carrie Jenks (clockwise from upper left), Richard Lazarus, and Jim Stock.","src":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jenks_Lazarus_Stock.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jenks_Lazarus_Stock.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jenks_Lazarus_Stock.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2025\/04\/Jenks_Lazarus_Stock.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":316089,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2020\/11\/harvard-experts-on-whats-next-in-climate-policy\/","url_meta":{"origin":214226,"position":3},"title":"So how much change can Biden bring on climate change?","author":"Lian Parsons","date":"November 23, 2020","format":false,"excerpt":"Harvard environmental experts discuss what\u2019s next in climate-change policy.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Nation &amp; World&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Nation &amp; World","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/nation-world\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"Solar panels.","src":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/andreas-gucklhorn-solarpanels-unsplash1.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/andreas-gucklhorn-solarpanels-unsplash1.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/andreas-gucklhorn-solarpanels-unsplash1.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/11\/andreas-gucklhorn-solarpanels-unsplash1.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]},{"id":214314,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2016\/11\/ex-epa-official-sees-narrow-openings-for-climate-progress\/","url_meta":{"origin":214226,"position":4},"title":"Ex-EPA official sees narrow openings for climate progress","author":"gazettejohnbaglione","date":"November 22, 2016","format":false,"excerpt":"In a Harvard talk, ex-EPA official Robert Perciasepe outlined some narrow openings for bipartisanship on environmental issues.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Science &amp; Tech&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Science &amp; Tech","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/science-technology\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/111516_perciasepe_0591_605.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/111516_perciasepe_0591_605.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/11\/111516_perciasepe_0591_605.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x"},"classes":[]},{"id":244570,"url":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/story\/2018\/05\/medical-school-students-address-environmental-issues-from-physicians-perspective\/","url_meta":{"origin":214226,"position":5},"title":"Environmental medicine brings climate change to forefront","author":"gazettejohnbaglione","date":"May 15, 2018","format":false,"excerpt":"During a panel discussion at Harvard Medical School, members of Students for Environmental Awareness in Medicine gave the physicians\u2019 perspective on how environmental issues will impact human health.","rel":"","context":"In &quot;Health&quot;","block_context":{"text":"Health","link":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/section\/health\/"},"img":{"alt_text":"","src":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/050718_hms_048.jpg?resize=350%2C200","width":350,"height":200,"srcset":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/050718_hms_048.jpg?resize=350%2C200 1x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/050718_hms_048.jpg?resize=525%2C300 1.5x, https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/05\/050718_hms_048.jpg?resize=700%2C400 2x"},"classes":[]}],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/214226","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/108352576"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=214226"}],"version-history":[{"count":11,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/214226\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":266673,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/214226\/revisions\/266673"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/214227"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=214226"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=214226"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=214226"},{"taxonomy":"format","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/gazette-formats?post=214226"},{"taxonomy":"series","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/news.harvard.edu\/gazette\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/series?post=214226"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}