Promoting Energy Independence and Economic Growth

Background

Impacts on Law and Regulation

Before its revocation, the executive directive issued in March 2017 significantly impacted environmental and energy regulations in the United States. The order aimed to dismantle regulations seen as burdensome to fossil fuel industries. It instructed federal agencies to review and potentially rescind rules that restricted energy production. A tangible effect was the rollback of the Clean Power Plan, which had set state-specific carbon dioxide emissions revision targets for power plants. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was directed to reassess these standards, effectively halting their implementation. Additionally, this order negated previous guidance on considering greenhouse gas emissions in federal environmental assessments, thereby altering the scope and depth of such evaluations.

Directives and Operational Adjustments

It also prompted the disbandment of the Interagency Working Group on Social Cost of Greenhouse Gases and dismissed its metrics, mandating that federal agencies revert to using older standards that did not include comprehensive cost assessments of carbon emissions. Furthermore, the order lifted the moratorium on coal leasing on federal lands, effectively reviving opportunities for coal extraction and prompting the Department of the Interior to restart coal leasing activities. This was a boon for the coal industry, which had been in decline due to increased competition from natural gas and renewables. These actions underlined the administration's commitment to prioritize fossil fuel interests over previous environmental commitments.

Agency Compliance and Enforcement

Government departments and agencies swiftly complied, initiating reviews and suspensions of various regulatory standards. The Department of the Interior annulled several Obama-era directives aimed at curbing climate impacts from oil and gas operations. This shift was evident in reduced enforcement actions against violations of environmental laws, reflecting an agency-wide shift to a more industry-friendly stance. The order de-emphasized climate considerations in the national security conversation and encouraged departments to deprioritize innovations in renewable energy technologies, steering focus and funding away from them. As agencies set to reduce compliance checks, they offered a clear signal that the administration would ease operational constraints for energy companies.

Reason for Revocation

A Shift in Ideology

Upon taking office, President Joseph R. Biden Jr. revoked the 2017 order as part of a broader effort to address climate change and re-establish the primacy of scientific evidence in environmental policymaking. The new administration viewed the prior executive actions as detrimental to environmental protection efforts and inconsistent with emerging global standards on carbon emissions reduction. Revocation was a critical component of reversing policies that were perceived to prioritize short-term economic gains over long-term environmental sustainability. This transition marked a return to valuing ecological preservation and the transition to clean energy industries as central tenets of national policy.

Climate Change and Environmental Policy

President Biden's move resonated with a sweeping commitment to international climate agreements, especially rejoining the Paris Agreement, which the previous administration had withdrawn from. The revocation also underlined a paradigm shift towards acknowledging climate change as an existential threat demanding robust policy responses. It was indicative of an ideology that emphasized re-imagining economic growth trajectories to align with ecological resilience, promoting cleaner production methods, and enhancing energy efficiency across sectors. Such shifts necessitated repealing earlier policies that hampered progress in reducing greenhouse gas emissions.

Economic and Social Considerations

The decision was also influenced by a recognition of the shifting economic and job opportunities within renewable energy markets. The Biden administration articulated the economic potential of investing in renewable energy sectors, which were growing at a fast pace and providing more employment opportunities than declining fossil fuel industries. The emphasis was on inclusive growth that saw transitioning workers from traditional energy sectors to roles in clean technology industries as an imperative for future-proofing the economy.

Political Dynamics and Institutional Reform

Revocation aligned with Biden's broader agenda to restore federal agencies' integrity and reaffirm environmental regulatory frameworks that were undermined during the previous administration. It demonstrated a commitment to leveraging science-driven policies and restoring public trust in federal environmental stewardship. Additionally, it has been viewed as an active response to the electorate’s increasing awareness and concern regarding the impacts of climate change, evidenced by weather extremes and environmental degradation.

Winners

Renewable Energy Industry

The clean energy sector was poised to benefit substantially from the revocation, seeing the resurgence of favorable policy environments for wind, solar, and other renewable energies. Companies operating in these fields, such as NextEra Energy, First Solar, and Vestas Wind Systems, stood to gain from expanded government incentives, subsidies, and research investments aimed at accelerating the transition to sustainable energy. Renewed regulatory structures and market access further sustained growth trajectories in these sectors, fostering innovation and technology advancements.

Environmental Advocacy and Public Health

Environmental advocacy groups welcomed the return to stricter emissions regulation and renewed environmental reviews. Organizations such as the Sierra Club and the Natural Resources Defense Council found the revocation empowering, reinforcing their ongoing efforts to enforce stronger environmental standards and reduce pollution. Public health outcomes, particularly for marginalized communities disproportionately affected by industrial pollution, were expected to improve measurably, given reduced emissions and cleaner air.

Green Infrastructure and Innovation

The broader green infrastructure sector, encompassing energy efficiency and smart grid technologies, anticipated a positive impact as policy focus shifted toward sustainability. Partnerships among tech companies, local governments, and private enterprises were poised to spur innovation, facilitate technology deployment, and expand urban greening projects. Meaningful investments and subsidies signaled the administration's intent to bolster these efforts and ensure environmentally conscious urban planning initiatives that had previously been stymied gain traction.

Losers

Fossil Fuel Industry

Coal and oil sectors faced significant setbacks due to the order's revocation. Companies such as Peabody Energy and Arch Resources retained operational challenges as federal support waned and regulatory compliance requirements intensified post-revocation. This shift jeopardized ongoing and future projects that had previously benefited from lenient environmental oversight, leading to potential economic contraction and adjustments in strategic planning within these industries.

States and Regions Dependent on Fossil Fuels

Regions with economies heavily reliant on fossil fuels, like those in Appalachia, bore the brunt of increased regulation as federal policies pivoted toward clean energy. Such regions faced economic difficulties as market dynamics shifted toward renewables, highlighting the pressing need for economic diversification and workforce retraining initiatives. The political ramifications in these areas were projected to impact state governance and electoral outcomes as local governments navigated these transitions.

Associated Supply Chains and Ancillary Industries

Ancillary industries, such as those providing equipment and services to fossil fuel operations, also experienced adverse effects. Suppliers faced diminishing demand as energy companies cut back on operations and capital expenditures due to increased regulatory costs and shifting market conditions. Additionally, workforce reductions in fossil fuel-dependent sectors affected associated communities, with ripple effects felt across local businesses and economies tied to these industries.