America’s Climate [Policy] Hypocrisy: The Disconnect between the Climate Change Aims and Action

The op-ed “America’s Climate Policy Hypocrisy: The Disconnect between the Climate Change Aims and Actions” highlights that amidst escalating environmental concerns, the United States appears to grapple with a disconcerting paradox between its climate change aspirations and its policies. Despite voicing commitments to address climate issues, the nation’s ongoing dependence on fossil fuels and inadequate efforts in environmental justice initiatives highlight its climate hypocrisy. The disconnect between rhetoric and action raises critical questions about America’s commitment to combating climate change and the urgency of implementing meaningful reforms. (Photo Source: Melissa Bradley on Unsplash). 

On January 26th, 2024, the White House announced a temporary pause on pending approvals of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) exports to the Non-Free Trade Agreement (FTA) countries. It aims to address the increasing concerns about climate change and the mounting domestic prices (“FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Temporary Pause on Pending Approvals of Liquefied Natural Gas Exports”). This decision happens to have been made at the beginning of the year, coinciding with the upcoming Presidential elections in November 2024. As of 2023, the United States emerged as the world’s leading oil producer, effectively surpassing Qatar. Indeed, the United States achieved a historic peak in oil production, reaching approximately 13.2 million barrels a day (“United States produces more crude oil than any country, ever”). The state of Texas alone contributes around 5.6 million barrels a day (“Texas oil and gas group says industry is surging”). Moreover, the US has become the largest exporter of LNG just last year.  

As the world grapples with the need to address climate change, the United States has found itself mired in hypocrisy. Notwithstanding its rhetoric of climate responsibility and commitment to reducing carbon emissions, the reality paints a starkly different picture. A glaring example of America’s climate hypocrisy lies in its continued reliance on fossil fuels, particularly shale gas and oil. Throughout the 2020 election campaigns, the Biden administration pledged to steer the nation away from reliance on fossil fuels (Ronayne and Knickmeyer). However, after the elections, the administration has overseen the largest expansion of oil and gas production to date. The Biden administration has approved extensive fossil fuel projects like Alaska’s willow oil project, the Mountain Valley fracked gas pipeline, and several other oil-LNG export terminals (Gardner). This highlights a disparity between their promises and their subsequent actions. 

America’s failure to adequately address environmental justice issues highlights another dimension of its climate hypocrisy. In spite of environmental justice (EJ) being touted as a top priority by the Biden administration, the implementation of initiatives, like the  “Justice40 Initiative,” has fallen short. The “Justice40 Initiative”  aimed to ensure that 40% of the benefits from climate and environmental programs would flow to Environmental Justice (EJ) communities (“Justice40 Initiative | Environmental Justice”). An EJ community is considered to be more affected by environmental hazards than others. These communities often include minority, low-income, indigenous, and tribal populations (“Environmental Justice | US EPA”). However, specifics as to what constitutes benefits, and how to satisfy the 40% rule remain undefined. 

The Inflation Reduction Act (2022) is the U.S. Congressional legislation aimed at curbing inflation, which includes measures such as changes in tax policies and investments in clean energy and infrastructure (“INFLATION REDUCTION ACT OF 2022”). However, the act fails to protect EJ communities and reduce fossil fuel production. Current trends suggest that oil and gas production, as well as exports, will nearly double by 2035. This will exacerbate the sufferings of communities impacted by gas and oil, namely black, brown, and indigenous communities in the Appalachia, Gulf of Mexico, and Permian Basin of Texas and New Mexico (Rees). Furthermore, the Biden administration’s actions, such as auctioning off over 73 acres of Gulf of  Mexico public waters to oil and gas industries in Lease Sale 259 at the beginning of 2023 (“Lease Sale 259”), pose significant environmental risks. This auction marked the largest offshore lease sale in U.S. history,  with the potential for severe impacts on EJ, such as the extinction of endangered species like the Rice’s whales, an increased risk of oil spill, and substantial greenhouse gas emissions (Meigs).

Climate reparations represent a critical aspect of climate justice. These reparations offer a means to take responsibility and support low-income countries grappling with the devastating effects of climate change. At the CoP27 in Egypt (November 2022), a landmark agreement was reached. This agreement established a loss and damage fund aimed at compensating poor and vulnerable nations for their climate-related losses funded by developed countries. Despite being one of the world’s largest historical emitters of greenhouse gasses,  the United States has staunchly opposed efforts to contribute. In fact, the US Climate envoy, John Kerry, stated in July last year that the country would not pay reparations “under any circumstances” to developing countries hit by climate change-induced disasters (Slow). Regardless of stated commitments to environmental justice, such actions underscore the need for greater accountability and coherence in U.S. climate and environmental policies. Moreover, the United States’ withdrawal from the Paris Agreement under the Trump administration dealt a severe blow to global efforts to address climate change. While President Biden re-joined the agreement, the damage to America’s reputation as a reliable partner in climate action had already been done. This back and forth on climate positions of the U.S. erodes trust and hinders progress. 

The US appears to be caught in a frustrating deadlock between two polarized political factions. Wherein one side is reluctant to recognize the urgency of addressing climate change altogether, the other side seemingly acknowledges its urgency but reflects inconsistency and duplicity in its actions. This has led the U.S. to a standstill in its climate policies. Amidst the recent conflict in the Middle East, President Biden chose not to attend the 2023 UN climate summit, CoP 28, held in the UAE (Joselow). This move implies a diminishing prioritization and a waning emphasis on climate change action and policies.  

Ultimately, addressing America’s climate hypocrisy requires more than just rhetoric – it demands bold and decisive actions. This requires a fundamental shift in priorities, policies, and practices to align with the urgent need to mitigate the climate crisis. This will have the effect of transitioning into a sustainable, low-carbon, and clean energy future. Global warming has recently exceeded the 1.5°C threshold target as outlined in the Paris Agreement. Surpassing this threshold amplifies the likelihood and risk of severe impacts on ecosystems and regions beyond the global tolerance levels (Di Liberto). The stakes are too high to continue down the path of half-measures and empty promises.

*******

Yashwani Kularia is a first-year Graduate Student at NYU’s Center of Global Affairs (CGA) pursuing an MS in Global Affairs with a concentration in Transnational Security with a twin specialization in Data Analytics and the United Nations. Her academic and research interests include exploring cross-border terrorism, multiple forms of extremism, counterterrorism, and geopolitics. She has worked with the Ramboll as a Junior Consultant and at the US Army War College as an intern. In addition to her studies, she serves as President of the Student Association of Global Affairs (SAGA) for the academic year 2024-2025.

Works Cited

Di Liberto, Tom. “What’s in a number? The meaning of the 1.5-C climate threshold.” Climate.gov, 9 January 2024, https://www.climate.gov/news-features/features/whats-number-meaning-15-c-climate-threshold. Accessed 26 April 2024.

“Environmental Justice | US EPA.” Environmental Protection Agency, 6 February 2024, https://www.epa.gov/environmentaljustice/learn-about-environmental-justice. Accessed 26 April 2024.

“FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Announces Temporary Pause on Pending Approvals of Liquefied Natural Gas Exports.” The White House, 26 January 2024, https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2024/01/26/fact-sheet-biden-harris-administration-announces-temporary-pause-on-pending-approvals-of-liquefied-natural-gas-exports/. Accessed 4 April 2024.

Gardner, Timothy. “Biden admin greenlights LNG exports from Alaska project.” Reuters, 14 April 2023, https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/biden-admin-greenlights-lng-exports-alaska-project-document-2023-04-14/. Accessed 26 April 2024.

“INFLATION REDUCTION ACT OF 2022.” Department of Energy, https://www.energy.gov/lpo/inflation-reduction-act-2022. Accessed 26 April 2024.

Joselow, Maxine. “Biden to skip world leaders’ summit at COP28 climate talks in Dubai.” Washington Post, 26 November 2023, https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2023/11/26/biden-cop28-climate-summit-dubai/. Accessed 4 April 2024.

“Justice40 Initiative | Environmental Justice.” The White House, https://www.whitehouse.gov/environmentaljustice/justice40/. Accessed 4 April 2024.

“Lease Sale 259.” Bureau of Ocean Energy Management, 29 March 2023, https://www.boem.gov/oil-gas-energy/leasing/lease-sale-259. Accessed 4 April 2024.

Meigs, James B. “The Big Squeeze: How Biden’s Environmental Justice Agenda Hurts the Economy and the Environment.” Manhattan Institute, 7 September 2023, https://manhattan.institute/article/how-bidens-environmental-justice-agenda-hurts-economy-and-environment. Accessed 4 April 2024.

Rees, Collin. “Biden’s Fossil Fuel Fail: How U.S. Oil & Gas Supply Rises under the Inflation Reduction Act.” Oil Change International, 20 November 2023, https://priceofoil.org/2023/11/20/fossil-fuel-fail/. Accessed 4 April 2024.

Ronayne, Kathleen, and Ellen Knickmeyer. “Biden calls for ‘transition’ from oil, GOP sees opening.” AP News, 23 October 2020, https://apnews.com/article/election-2020-joe-biden-donald-trump-technology-climate-26908b855045d5ce7342fd01be8bcc10. Accessed 4 April 2024.

Slow, Oliver. “US refuses climate reparations for developing nations.” BBC, 13 July 2023, https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-66197366. Accessed 4 April 2024.

“Texas oil and gas group says industry is surging.” The Texas Tribune, 30 January 2024, https://www.texastribune.org/2024/01/30/texas-oil-gas-association-annual-report/. Accessed 26 April 2024.

“United States produces more crude oil than any country, ever.” U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), 11 March 2024, https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=61545. Accessed 26 April 2024.