Former President Donald Trump

2024 Presidential Election: Biden vs. Trump – Examining Their Energy Policies

The 2024 Presidential Election pits Biden vs. Trump in a showdown over energy policies. The public is rightfully cynical about claims made by politicians. I have often noted that we tend to elect those who make the most believable campaign promises. But after they are in office, many politicians fail to deliver on their campaign promises. They tell people what they need to in order to get elected.

But the 2024 presidential election offers something unique for voters. Instead of evaluating campaign promises, we can see the track records of two men who have already been president. Past behavior often serves as a reliable predictor of future actions because it reflects established patterns and habits. This concept, rooted in behavioral psychology, suggests that individuals are likely to repeat behaviors that have been reinforced over time, creating a consistent trajectory for future behavior.

With that in mind, we could evaluate the proposed energy policies of Joe Biden and Donald Trump. But since we already have track records for each man serving as president, it is perhaps more informative to look at those respective track records.

From a big-picture viewpoint, Donald Trump has been pro-fossil fuels but provided less support for green energy. Joe Biden has been the opposite, creating a more hostile environment for fossil fuel production, and a more conducive environment for green energy. But as they say, “The road to hell is paved with good intentions.” Thus, let’s look at each candidate’s energy policies and the results of those policies.

Note that the purpose of this article isn’t to promote one candidate over the other, but rather to give a factual account of each president’s energy policies while in office.

Donald Trump’s Energy Policies

During Donald Trump’s presidency, policies heavily favored the coal, oil, and natural gas industries. This included opening federal lands and offshore areas to fossil fuel exploration and extraction, such as the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR). 

The Trump administration fast-tracked the approval process for key infrastructure projects, including the Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines. These projects were aimed at boosting the transport of oil and natural gas across North America. The Trump administration supported investments in innovative energy technologies, such as carbon capture and storage (CCS) and small modular reactors (SMRs) for nuclear power.  

But Trump came under criticism from environmentalists for several policies. The administration’s withdrawal from the Paris Agreement underscored its focus on national energy interests over global climate commitments, reflecting a broader strategy of prioritizing economic growth over environmental considerations. 

Trump’s administration rolled back regulations aimed at reducing carbon emissions and protecting the environment. For example, the Clean Power Plan, which sought to reduce carbon pollution from power plants, was replaced with the Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) rule, which provided states more flexibility in setting emissions standards. The administration also rolled back regulations on methane emissions from oil and gas operations, arguing that it would boost energy production and economic growth.

The administration also repealed the Clean Water Rule, which had expanded the scope of protected waterways, potentially reducing restrictions on mining and drilling operations.

While the Trump Administration’s focus was predominantly on fossil fuels, there was some support for renewable energy initiatives. The Department of Energy under Trump announced several funding opportunities for advanced energy technologies and grid modernization. The administration also imposed tariffs on imported solar panels, which some critics argued could hinder the growth of the solar industry in the U.S.​ The counterargument to this was these tariffs should encourage more domestic production of solar panels.

Overall, Trump’s administration placed a strong emphasis on promoting fossil fuel production and reducing regulatory burdens on the energy sector. These actions were intended to bolster U.S. energy independence, create jobs, and position the country as a dominant player in the global energy market. However, these policies were often criticized for their potential long-term environmental impacts and for downplaying the importance of renewable energy sources and climate change.

President Joe BidenJoe Biden’s Energy Policies

Joe Biden’s presidency has marked a significant shift in U.S. energy policy, emphasizing a transition towards clean energy and addressing climate change.

While Biden has not completely turned away from fossil fuels, on his first day in office he canceled a key permit for the Keystone XL pipeline project that would have allowed the project to cross into the U.S., citing concerns that it would worsen climate change. This effectively killed the project.

Another of Biden’s first actions as president was to reenter the Paris Agreement, signaling to the world a renewed commitment to global climate leadership. This move underscored the administration’s focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions and combating climate change.

The Biden Administration has imposed stricter regulations on new fossil fuel projects. This includes pausing new oil and gas leasing on federal lands and waters as part of a review of federal leasing policies. More recently, the administration paused new permits to export liquefied natural gas (LNG) until the Department of Energy finishes a new review of climate impacts.

The administration set a goal of achieving a 50-52% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions by 2030, relative to 2005 levels, and aimed for net-zero emissions by 2050. These targets are part of the broader agenda to address climate change and accelerate the transition to renewable energy.

Biden reversed many of the environmental rollbacks from the previous administration, including reinstating stricter emissions standards for vehicles and industries. This also involved reestablishing regulations for waterways and public lands. The administration has focused on tightening methane regulations, aiming to significantly reduce methane emissions from the oil and gas industry.

The Biden Administration passed the bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, which allocated $1.2 trillion for various infrastructure projects, including $65 billion for power grid improvements and $21 billion for environmental remediation. It also included significant investments in clean energy technologies and electric vehicle (EV) infrastructure. The Inflation Reduction Act also earmarked billions of dollars toward energy security and addressing climate change.

The Biden administration has prioritized the growth of the EV market by setting a goal for electric vehicles to make up 50% of all new car sales by 2030. This includes substantial funding for building a nationwide network of EV charging stations​​. The administration’s policies include incentives for consumers to purchase electric vehicles and for manufacturers to invest in EV production.

In summary, Joe Biden’s presidency has been characterized by a strong push towards renewable energy and significant climate action, after promising to transition the U.S. economy towards a more sustainable future. These efforts represent a marked departure from the previous administration’s policies and reflect a broader vision of environmental stewardship and economic transformation.

Trump’s Scorecard

Although the energy policies of the candidates are in stark contrast, the effect each had on the energy sector may seem at first counterintuitive. It is often hard to directly correlate a president’s policies to their impacts on the energy sector, because much of what happens in the energy sector plays out over a long period, or is more impacted by macro factors well beyond a president’s control.

For example, I have often noted a seeming contradiction between the George W. Bush and Barack Obama Administrations regarding oil production. While Bush had strong ties to the oil industry, and was a pro-energy president, U.S. oil production declined all eight years he was in office.

However, the Bush Administration passed several laws aimed at accelerating the development of fracking. Many of those laws helped spur the subsequent enormous increase in U.S. oil and gas production.

The irony is that President Obama presided over most of this production surge. However, the regulations and developments in the industry that enabled the shale boom took place during the Bush Administration. Those impacts are still felt today all over the world. But if you were only looking at oil production, you might mistakenly credit Obama’s policies for this huge surge.

The point is that these situations are often more complex than they seem on the surface. It is also somewhat hard to make direct comparisons between Trump and Biden due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. But let’s attempt to make a comparison.

President Trump took office in January 2017. The average price of gasoline had fallen for two years. Oil production had risen in five of the six previous years, but had dipped in 2016 in response to a price war from OPEC.

During President Trump’s first three years in office, oil production resumed growth at about the same rate as from 2010 to 2015. New oil production records were set in 2018 and 2019. Natural gas production records were set in 2017, 2018, and 2019.

The national average price of gasoline rose during Trump’s first two years in office, before pulling back some in his third year. Trump is often associated with low gasoline prices, but the average price during Trump’s first three years in office was higher than during Obama’s last two years in office. Again, one shouldn’t read too much into this, as there were macro factors – like strong global demand – putting upward pressure on prices.

The white houseThen the COVID-19 pandemic hit in 2020, and that upended the oil markets. By April 2020, stay-at-home orders caused oil demand to crash. Production, in turn, dropped by 3 million barrels per day in May 2020. Oil futures briefly went negative. The stock market was crashing, and the national average gasoline price briefly dropped below $2.00 a gallon. Some fondly recall $2.00 a gallon of gasoline, but they forget that it’s because there was little demand for gasoline since most people were staying at home.

By the end of 2020, gasoline prices and oil production had recovered somewhat, but the repercussions of the pandemic would continue. Biden’s energy policies didn’t help, but supply chain disruptions made the biggest impact on gasoline prices during Biden’s presidency.

From Obama’s last year in office through Trump’s last year in office, oil production increased by 2.5 million BPD. However, production in 2020 was 1 million BPD lower than in 2019 due to the pandemic. The 2019 production record would stand until President Biden’s 3rd year in office.

Renewable energy would continue to grow during Trump’s presidency. Between 2016 and 2020, renewable energy consumption in the U.S. rose by 21.5%. The growth in solar power consumption was especially strong under Trump, rising 138% during his term.

However, the bottom line for energy companies wasn’t as good under Trump. The primary reason was that the energy sector had a horrible year in 2020 due to Covid. But let’s take a closer look at the financials of ExxonMobil, the largest publicly traded supermajor.

During Donald Trump’s first three years in office, ExxonMobil earned a total of $54.9 billion in net income. The pandemic hit during the 4th year, and ExxonMobil posted a loss of $22.4 billion. So, for Trump’s full term, ExxonMobil earned $32.5 billion. For comparison – and for reasons I will explain below – during Joe Biden’s first three years in office, ExxonMobil earned $114.8 billion in net income. (As a reference point, ExxonMobil earned $89.1 billion in net income during Obama’s second term).    

Thus, even if we omit the impacts of the pandemic, ExxonMobil earned more than twice as much during Biden’s first three years than it did under Trump’s first three years. This may seem counterintuitive given the respective administration’s attitudes toward the oil industry, but I will elaborate in the next section.    

Biden’s Scorecard

When Joe Biden entered office, the U.S. was still in the thick of the COVID-19 pandemic. Oil production had bounced back from the deep dive it took in the spring of 2020, but some of that production loss had been shut in permanently. Thus, as demand recovered, supply was slow to catch up. This began a surge in oil and gasoline prices that began in the summer of 2020, but that would persist throughout the first half of Biden’s term. 

When Biden was inaugurated, the national average price of gasoline was $2.48 per gallon. The price would steadily rise throughout his first year in office. For comparison, the average price during Biden’s first year in office was $3.10/gallon, versus $2.53/gallon during Donald Trump’s first year in office. This was great for oil companies, but not so great for consumers.

Early during Biden’s second year in office, Russia invaded Ukraine. In response to this, President Biden announced that the U.S. would stop importing Russian oil. Here we can draw a contrast between Trump’s presidency because he probably wouldn’t have made the same decision. For that matter, Trump has asserted that Russia would have never invaded Ukraine if he had been in office.

The decision to stop Russian imports disrupted operations in many U.S. In response, the price of oil surged to above $100/bbl, and the national average price of gasoline briefly topped $5.00/gallon. The average price of gasoline during Biden’s second year in office was $4.06/gallon, the highest annual average on record.

Biden responded with the largest-ever release of oil from the nation’s Strategic Petroleum Reserve (SPR). This is another decision President Trump might not have made. However, this release is generally cited as a factor in helping bring energy prices back down in 2023.

Many of Biden’s critics have focused on high prices and his overall hostility toward the oil and gas industry. But the results are mixed. As previously noted, oil companies made a lot more money under Biden. That’s because high prices are good for oil companies – but bad for consumers. 

However, U.S. oil production also resumed its growth under Biden. From the 2020 plunge, oil production grew in 2022, and then surged to a new all-time high in 2023. It is on track to set another production record this year. Natural gas production has set production records during all three years Biden has been in office and is on track to set a new production record this year.

Renewable energy grew by 11% during Biden’s first three years, with solar power surging by another 82%. This growth rate is consistent with, but a little less than growth during Trump’s first three years in office.

The Bottom Line

Energy policy achievements are often difficult to decipher. The single biggest factor that has impacted the oil and gas industry in the U.S. over the past 20 years is the shale boom. Even though President Obama wasn’t pro-oil, he presided over the largest expansion of U.S. oil production in our history. Macro factors were more important than his policy decisions.

Thus, even though Biden has been hostile toward oil and gas, the industry continues to set records. Donald Trump was quick to take credit for production records set during his term. Biden has largely been silent on the issue, largely because of promises he made to move the U.S. away from oil and gas.

The reality is that these production records are not a result of Trump’s or Biden’s policies. They may have had a marginal impact, and there may be a longer-term impact, but it is hard to correlate the results of a president’s energy policies with results in real-time.

Had Biden served during Trump’s term, and Trump during Biden’s, the results wouldn’t have been substantially different when it comes to oil production. There may have been an impact on prices depending on actions taken concerning Ukraine. But, natural gas and oil production records would likely have still been set in the years they were set.

The real bottom line is this. If you favor pro-fossil fuel policies that could come at the expense of environmental regulations and support for renewables, then Trump is your man. If you favor a more hostile environment for fossil fuels and more money funneled into renewables, then Biden is your man. Just be sure to maintain realistic expectations around the short-term impacts of either president’s policies.

Subscribe to get more posts from Robert Rapier
Previous articleGasoline Prices Under Trump: Fact vs. Perception
Next articleBorehole Battery: A Solution for Asset Retirement Obligations Utilizing IRA Tax Credits
Robert Rapier
Robert Rapier is a chemical engineer in the energy industry and Editor-in-Chief of Shale Magazine. Robert has 25 years of international engineering experience in the chemicals, oil and gas, and renewable energy industries and holds several patents related to his work. He has worked in the areas of oil refining, oil production, synthetic fuels, biomass to energy, and alcohol production. He is author of multiple newsletters for Investing Daily and of the book Power Plays. Robert has appeared on 60 Minutes, The History Channel, CNBC, Business News Network, CBC, and PBS. His energy-themed articles have appeared in numerous media outlets, including the Wall Street Journal, Washington Post, Christian Science Monitor, and The Economist.

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here