Attempts to quantify the impact former President Donald Trump’s reelection will have on the energy sector are complicated by the sheer number of moving pieces and his unpredictable leadership style.
The morning after Trump’s comeback victory, many deeply knowledgeable people were sharing their opinions, often backed up with inarguable facts. However, Nov. 6 is still too early to predict what impact Trump will have on generation and transmission investment and policy.
As the day began, bond yields jumped, many clean energy stocks tanked, and the U.S. dollar’s value surged on expectations of what might happen in the next few years. But many variables remain unknown:
-
- Trump’s promised tariffs might boost the cost of development, but corporate tax cuts might ease the pressure, and increased deficit spending might boost the cost of debt.
- His America First stance could create macroeconomic trends in its own right.
- Republicans controlling both chambers of Congress could greatly empower the president but perhaps not on every issue, as the margin of control is likely to be thin.
- Trump has pledged to gut the Inflation Reduction Act, but some of the clearest economic benefits from the landmark measure have been in Republican states whose congressional representatives likely would want to protect them.
- Trump has promised to increase and expedite domestic oil and gas production, but the U.S. already is producing more than any country ever has. And his threatened sanctions on Venezuela and Iran might alter commodity prices, as might his promised end to the Russia-Ukraine war.
To be sure, there were some clear losers from Trump re-election.
The Wall Street Journal summed the mood up in a single headline: “Why Trump’s Victory Is So Dangerous for Clean-Energy Companies.”
Three disparate examples: NextEra Energy, Plug Power and Sunrun closed 5.3%, 21.8% and 29.6% lower, respectively, on a day when the major U.S. stock indices all catapulted to record highs.
In its first take on the results, research and strategy firm Jeffries said there were more losers than winners, with the offshore wind, electric vehicle, hydrogen, residential solar and storage sectors at greatest risk. Inflation and Federal Reserve policy would be key determinants, it said.
But not every player in the “green” sector slumped on the election results.
GE Vernova, which follows the all-of-the-above strategy that some Republicans embrace, closed 6.5% higher. EV industry leader Tesla, whose CEO campaigned hard for the soon-to-be EV skeptic-in-chief, saw its stock close 14.8% higher.
Wind power, which Trump dismissed with an expletive at an October campaign rally, might very well have a tough few years ahead — especially in the offshore sector, which has been struggling to build momentum in U.S. waters and relies heavily on federal financial support.
Even if it cannot find a legally defensible means to halt the projects under construction or revoke leases and approvals, the Trump administration could stop defending the many lawsuits against these projects or slow-walk the regulatory process.
Speakers at a major offshore wind energy industry conference in Atlantic City, N.J., just a week before Election Day, put a brave face on the matter, but many were clearly hoping Vice President Kamala Harris would pull out a victory and clearly worried about the prospect of her defeat. (See WINDPOWER: Industry Puts on Game Face as Election Nears.)
The world’s leading offshore wind developer, Ørsted, and leading Western wind turbine manufacturer, Vestas, both saw their stock close 12.8% lower Nov. 6. Vestas had announced its first U.S. offshore turbine contract just eight weeks earlier.
The need for increased electrical generation and transmission capacity to support the U.S. economy and lifestyle does not change with Trump’s election. There is partisan disagreement, sometimes strident, on how to meet that need but broad agreement that it must be met.
With Trump returning to power and the party united behind him, there were many long faces in the clean energy and environmental advocacy communities Nov. 6.
“Donald Trump was a disaster for climate progress during his first term, and everything he’s said and done since suggests he’s eager to do even more damage this time,” Sierra Club Executive Director Ben Jealous said in a statement. The organization filed more than 300 lawsuits against his first administration and pledged to fight tooth and nail against any predations on the environment during the second.
Damage control was the order of the day after an election with a clear and uncontested result. While the climate and energy transition were not among the top speaking points of either candidate, there was no mistaking where they both stood.
Large industry groups spoke of moving forward.
American Clean Power Association CEO Jason Grumet congratulated Trump and reminded him that its members share his stated goals: bringing manufacturing back to U.S. communities and creating jobs.
“Domestically produced clean power is vital to meeting our nation’s surging electricity demand,” he said. “Our industry grew by double digits each year under the first Trump administration and has accelerated this rate of progress since. We are committed to working with the Trump-Vance Administration and the new Congress to continue this great American success story.”
Oceantic Network tried embracing rather than vilifying Trump. It credited his first administration with laying the groundwork for what is now a $40 billion U.S. industry that has directly invested $24 billion in 39 states and said Trump now can do more, and better. “With President Trump in office, we have the opportunity to harness even more investment and measurable economic benefits for communities across the country,” CEO Liz Burdock said. “The U.S. offshore wind industry stands ready to welcome new investments in American factories and shipyards.”