Dem
47
GOP
53
We don't mean to go to this well too often. However, there is a lot of coverage of this particular issue, for obvious reasons. The planet is getting warmer, the weather is getting more extreme, and Donald Trump is aggressively denying those realities. Well, actually, it goes beyond denial. He's not just sticking his head in the sand; he's taking steps to try to turn the energy clock back to 1970 or so, when oil was king and solar/wind were the province of a few, wild-eyed latter-day-hippie pinkos.
Domestically, by virtue of the pliant Congress and the BBB, Trump is having some success. Investors in the United States foresaw that he might possibly win the 2024 election, and many decided not to put their money into projects that might be wrecked with a flourish of the presidential pen. Consequently, American investment in renewable energy in the first half of 2025 dropped by 36%. A further decline is expected in the second half, although probably not as steep as 36%.
Globally, by contrast, Trump's side of the issue is losing bigly. A new analysis from BloombergNEF (née Bloomberg New Energy Finance) reveals that global investment in renewable energy in the first half of 2025 was a record $386 billion. That is a slight uptick from the second half of 2024. And the main thing that is making it possible for the upward trend to continue, despite the American retreat, is dramatically increased investment in China.
Here's a look at renewable energy investment, globally, over the last 10 years:
The lesson here seems very clear to us. Trump and his political party can try to resist, but they are largely screaming into the void. Green energy is ascendant, whether the Republicans and their Big Oil benefactors like it or not.
And actually, let's put a finer point on it. The three biggest polluters among the nations of the world are China, India and the United States. Two of those three have gotten very serious about renewable energy, either because of environmental concerns, or because renewable is a better economic choice, or both. The third of the three has gotten serious in places (the blue states), and at various times (the Obama years, the Biden years), and will eventually be under the leadership of a president who will reverse the backwards-looking policies of the Trump administration. In other words, the world may not be able to reverse global warming entirely, but there's an excellent chance that everyone will eventually start pulling in the same direction, and that the damage can be limited, and the worst outcomes can be avoided.
Have a good weekend, all! (Z)