The Trump administration pushed fossil fuels over clean energy. Here’s what that did to the transition—and how green technology and AI can keep you ahead anyway.
Most US voters say they support clean energy, but federal policy doesn’t always match those priorities. Under the Trump administration, agencies that should’ve been accelerating the shift to green technology repeatedly favored coal, oil, and gas instead.
This matters because policy decisions made a few years ago still shape which projects get financed in 2025, which technologies scale, and where the next generation of green jobs land. If you care about solar, wind, energy storage, or AI-powered efficiency tools, you can’t ignore how fossil fuel policy is built, sold, and defended.
In this article, I’ll unpack how the Trump administration pushed polluting fossil fuels across the United States, what that did to clean power momentum, and—crucially—what businesses, cities, and climate-focused teams can do now to counteract those choices using modern green technology and AI.
How the Trump Administration Backed Fossil Fuels Over Clean Energy
The Trump administration didn’t just “prefer” fossil fuels. It systematically used federal agencies to tilt the playing field toward coal, oil, and gas while undermining solar and wind.
Key moves that boosted fossil fuels
Here’s the core pattern of what happened:
- Deregulation for fossil fuels: The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rolled back or weakened dozens of rules meant to limit air pollution, methane leaks, and greenhouse gas emissions. Coal plants and oil & gas operators got more room to pollute with fewer penalties.
- Attempts to prop up coal plants: The Department of Energy explored ways to keep uneconomic coal and nuclear plants running in the name of “grid resilience,” even as cheaper solar and wind were outcompeting them.
- Undercutting climate science: Federal climate reports were sidelined or delayed, and agency websites scrubbed references to climate change. That made it easier politically to justify continued investment in fossil fuels.
- Slower approvals for renewables on federal land: While fossil leases (oil, gas, coal) on public lands and waters were expanded, permitting for large-scale wind and solar projects often moved more slowly or faced new obstacles.
The message to the market was clear: fossil fuels were politically favored, even when they weren’t economically competitive.
Why this mattered for clean power momentum
Energy investors hate uncertainty more than they hate regulation. When the rules whiplash back and forth, capital gets conservative.
Under Trump:
- Some utilities delayed coal plant retirements, assuming weaker enforcement and friendlier rules.
- Developers hesitated or re-scoped wind and solar projects because tax credit policy and permitting looked less stable.
- Federal research on clean energy and grid modernization saw mixed signals and attempted budget cuts, even as private sector interest grew.
The reality? Clean energy still grew—because the economics were too strong to ignore—but growth was slower in some regions than it could’ve been with consistent, pro-renewable policy.
The Cost of Favoring Fossil Fuels: Health, Economic, and Climate Impacts
Supporting fossil fuels isn’t a neutral choice. It has predictable consequences for health, climate, and long-term competitiveness.
Health impacts of fossil-heavy policy
Coal, oil, and gas pollution isn’t abstract. Particulate matter, nitrogen oxides, and sulfur dioxide from power plants and refineries are linked to:
- Higher rates of asthma and respiratory illness
- Cardiovascular disease and strokes
- Premature deaths in polluted communities
Studies over the past decade consistently show that communities near coal plants and heavy fossil infrastructure bear a disproportionate burden—often low-income neighborhoods and communities of color.
Relaxing enforcement or weakening EPA rules effectively shifts costs from polluters to people. Hospitals, schools, and families pay the price through higher healthcare bills and lost productivity.
Economic drag from clinging to legacy fuels
There’s a stubborn myth that protecting fossil fuels protects jobs. Short term, you might preserve some positions at specific mines or plants. Long term, you trap regions in declining industries while the rest of the world races ahead on clean energy.
Here’s what actually creates durable economic value:
- Solar and wind build-out: Construction, maintenance, and grid integration support local jobs for decades.
- Energy efficiency and smart buildings: Retrofitting and managing buildings with green technology saves money and creates ongoing service demand.
- Battery storage and grid software: These are high-skill, high-value sectors where US companies can lead.
When federal policy props up fossil assets that no longer make sense on the balance sheet, utilities and governments pour money into lifelines instead of innovation. That’s a bad trade in any industry, especially one changing as fast as energy.
Climate risk and stranded assets
Every year of overbuilding or protecting fossil fuel infrastructure increases the risk of stranded assets—plants, pipelines, and fields that can’t earn back their investment as climate policy tightens.
For investors and businesses this isn’t a theoretical risk. It shows up as:
- Writedowns on fossil-heavy portfolios
- Higher insurance costs for climate-exposed facilities
- Regulatory pressure to disclose climate-related financial risks
US policy that leans toward fossil fuels doesn’t remove those global pressures. It just delays adaptation and makes the eventual transition more chaotic and expensive.
Where Green Technology and AI Change the Equation
Here’s the thing about green technology: it doesn’t need ideological support to make sense. It just needs a fair field and clear rules. That’s where AI has become a surprisingly powerful accelerator.
AI in clean energy: from forecasting to optimization
AI already strengthens the business case for renewables by making them easier to manage and more profitable:
- Better forecasting: Machine learning models predict solar output and wind speeds at a granular level, reducing the “intermittency penalty” and cutting balancing costs.
- Grid orchestration: AI helps operators coordinate distributed energy resources—rooftop solar, batteries, EV chargers—so they act like a flexible virtual power plant.
- Predictive maintenance: Algorithms spot early warning signs in turbines, inverters, and storage systems, avoiding expensive failures and downtime.
When policy temporarily favors fossil fuels, these AI-driven gains keep renewables competitive anyway. They squeeze more value out of every panel, turbine, and battery deployed.
Smart buildings and industrial efficiency
Even in regions where fossil fuels still dominate the generation mix, green technology can dramatically cut demand:
- Building energy management systems use AI to control HVAC, lighting, and equipment based on real-time occupancy and weather.
- Industrial facilities apply AI to optimize processes, reduce waste heat, and shift loads to off-peak hours.
- Fleet operators route vehicles and charge EVs when the grid is cleaner and cheaper.
The result is straightforward: lower emissions per unit of GDP, less fuel burned, and better margins. Policy might lag, but the economics of efficiency don’t.
Data-driven climate decisions for businesses and cities
Cities, campuses, and companies don’t have to wait for federal leadership to act. With today’s data tools, they can:
- Map local emissions by source and location
- Model the impact of solar, storage, and efficiency projects
- Prioritize investments with the highest carbon and cost savings
AI helps turn messy data (utility bills, sensor logs, asset lists) into clear decisions: which building to retrofit first, which facility to electrify now, which vehicles to replace with EVs.
That’s the core theme of this Green Technology series: smart use of data and AI can partially offset bad policy by making clean choices obviously profitable.
What Businesses and Local Leaders Can Do Right Now
Federal politics can stall, swing, and contradict itself. Your strategy shouldn’t.
1. Assume stricter climate policy is coming
Even if one administration boosts fossil fuels, the long-term direction—globally and in many US states—is toward decarbonization.
Design your energy strategy as if:
- Carbon is going to be priced more explicitly (through taxes, fees, or reporting).
- Emissions disclosure will be mandatory and detailed.
- Climate-related risk will matter to lenders and insurers.
If you build for that world, you won’t be caught off guard when the policy pendulum swings back—because you planned for it.
2. Treat energy data as a strategic asset
Most organizations are sitting on years of underused data: meter readings, fuel records, building management logs. When you put that data to work, you can target emissions reductions in a focused way.
Start with:
- A clean baseline of current energy use and emissions
- A simple model of your biggest loads (buildings, fleets, processes)
- A shortlist of projects ranked by payback period and carbon impact
Then add AI tools where they make sense: forecasting, anomaly detection, optimization. You don’t need to automate everything overnight. Start where waste is obvious.
3. Use local and state policy to your advantage
While the Trump administration was rolling back federal protections, many states and cities pushed harder on clean energy—renewable portfolio standards, building codes, EV incentives.
Leverage what’s available where you operate:
- State-level tax credits and rebates for solar, storage, and efficiency
- City programs for building retrofits, green roofs, and district energy
- Utility programs that support demand response and distributed generation
Your local context often matters more than the federal headline.
4. Build a narrative that outlasts a single administration
If you’re trying to get internal buy-in for green technology investments, tie them to durable business goals:
- Lower operating costs and more predictable energy bills
- Reduced exposure to fuel price volatility
- Stronger ESG performance for investors and customers
When the story is “this is good business,” it doesn’t rise and fall with who runs the EPA.
Why Voting, Policy, and Technology All Matter
People who say voting doesn’t matter aren’t paying attention to the energy sector. The Trump administration’s push for coal, oil, and gas absolutely changed timelines, incentives, and public health outcomes. Different leaders make different calls on rules, enforcement, and subsidies—and that cascades through the whole system.
At the same time, the clean energy transition hasn’t stopped. Solar and wind costs kept falling. Battery storage scaled. AI made grids smarter and buildings more efficient. Green technology, especially when paired with intelligent software, proved resilient even under hostile policy.
For anyone working on climate solutions in 2025, the strategy I recommend is simple:
- Use your vote to support leaders who align with a clean, equitable energy future.
- Use your data to find the fastest emissions cuts inside your own operations.
- Use green technology and AI to stay ahead of policy shifts instead of reacting to them.
The next decade will be defined by how quickly we can align policy, markets, and technology. Fossil fuel interests will keep pushing for special treatment. Your edge comes from understanding that the future is electric, efficient, and intelligent—and building toward that future now, regardless of who’s in office.