Donald Trump’s return to the White House will have a hugely negative effect on climate change action in the short term, but the long-term impact is less certain, experts say.

With world leaders gathering next week for the latest UN climate talks, COP29Trump’s victory will be seen as a huge obstacle to progress in both reducing emissions and raising cash for developing countries.

The US president-elect is a known climate skeptic who has called efforts to boost green energy a “scam”.

But with renewable energy gaining a strong foothold in the US and popular support for wind and solar, Trump’s efforts to ramp up oil and gas may be less effective.

Although climate change has not played a huge role in this year’s campaign, Trump’s likely actions based on this date could be much more significant than in 2017.

At the time, he announced that the US would withdraw from the Paris Agreement on climate change, the most important UN process to combat climate change. The agreement saw almost all the world’s nations – for the first time – agree to reduce emissions of the greenhouse gases that cause global warming.

But the shock of Trump’s decision was limited. The rules of the treaty meant that the US could not withdraw until November 2020, months before leaving office.

If Trump pulls out again, he will only have to wait a year before the US exits completely. That would give him three years to chart his own course without having to report to the UN or be bound by its rules.

While President Joe Biden’s negotiators will be at next week’s COP talks in Azerbaijan, nothing they agree on will be binding on the Trump administration.

“The US at this COP is not just a lame duck, but a dead duck,” said Professor Richard Klein, an expert on climate change policy at the Stockholm Environment Institute.

“They can’t commit to anything, and that means countries like China won’t want to commit to anything.”

In recent years, wealthier countries such as the US, UK and EU states have tried to increase the funds available to developing countries to deal with climate change. But they also insist that major developing economies also contribute.

“The US basically wanted China to come up with some money for that fund as well. Now they won’t be able to do that. That leaves China off the hook,” Professor Klein said.

Climate scientists say developing countries need billions of dollars in additional investment to become net zero, where they do not contribute to climate change, and avoid the effects of rising temperatures.

While the US could leave the Paris Agreement fairly quickly, Trump would still be tied to other global efforts to fight climate change.

There have been reports that some of his supporters also want to turn their backs on them. Some have called for a complete break from UN climate change efforts, calling on the president-elect to leave something called UN Framework Convention on Climate Changethe treaty that forms the basis of global collective action to combat climate change.

This was ratified by the US Senate, almost unanimously, in 1992. Legal experts are unclear about the process of leaving the treaty, but any US effort to leave would be seen as a body blow to the principle of multilateral action for tackle the world’s greatest threat.

In addition to these exciting international actions, the new Trump administration is likely to push for a major increase in US oil and gas exploration, roll back environmental protections and impose high tariffs on electric vehicles and solar panels from China.

“You’re generally looking at a ‘drill baby drill’ philosophy,” Dan Eberhart, chief executive of oilfield services company Canary LLC, told Bloomberg News.

“You’re going to see offshore lease sales, you’re going to see pipelines moving much faster, you’re going to see fracking on federal lands and a mindset focused on reducing energy costs for consumers.”

It was a big one share price decline to turbine manufacturers on Wednesday as fears grew that U.S. offshore wind farms would be canceled by a Trump presidency.

But in the long term, it is unclear whether the new president will turn back the clock on coal, oil and gas, or curtail the growth of sustainable energy sources.

To begin with, he faces opposition – and especially from within his own party.

Biden’s Inflation Reduction Actwhich could eventually channel $1 trillion in green energy spending, has been hugely beneficial to Republican districts.

According to an analysis, about 85% of the money was in the areas they chose republicans.

With the International Energy Agency noting that global investment in clean technology is set to double that of coal, oil and gas by 2024, the new US administration may be reluctant to drive this type of green investment to other countries. more willing.

Climate leaders are very confident that the transition to green energy will not be derailed by the new Trump administration.

“The outcome of this election will be seen as a major blow to global action on climate change,” said Christiana Figueres, former UN climate chief.

“But it cannot and will not stop the changes underway to decarbonise the economy and meet the goals of the Paris Agreement.”