Experts warn Trump’s energy policies will spark chaos and hike consumer costs

WASHINGTON – One year into his second term, President Donald Trump has aggressively dismantled U.S. decarbonization efforts, using executive orders and emergency declarations to prioritize a fossil fuel agenda.

Sanya Carley, academic director at the Kleinman Center for Energy Policy, said the administration has systematically reversed previous climate initiatives. Key actions include opening vast tracts of federal land for oil and gas leasing and significantly slowing the permitting process for offshore wind projects.

The administration has also moved to repeal core components of the Inflation Reduction Act. Carley noted that these shifts have triggered the cancellation of numerous renewable energy projects and forced inefficient coal plants to remain operational, ultimately driving up utility bills for consumers.

This disruption in the energy sector comes as electricity demand surges, fueled largely by the growth of data centers. Carley warned that current policies encourage meeting this demand with fossil fuels, contributing to an energy affordability crisis for American households.

The prospective energy strategy of a second Trump administration represents far more than a mere policy reversal; it is a multi-pronged, systemic assault on the clean energy transition. This approach signals the rise of an "administrative presidency on steroids," leveraging a coordinated suite of executive orders, emergency declarations, and judicial appointments—alongside the potential purging of the federal civil service—to bypass congressional gridlock and unilaterally enforce a fossil-fuel-centric agenda.

A central paradox defines this doctrine: the administration seeks to manufacture a "state of emergency," framing the shift toward renewables as a national security threat to justify its interventionist tactics. In reality, these maneuvers risk triggering a genuine affordability crisis for American households. By mandating the continued operation of aging, uneconomic coal plants, the administration effectively transfers the high costs of inefficient legacy infrastructure directly onto consumer utility bills, creating a tangible fiscal burden under the guise of energy reliability.

Ultimately, this policy framework creates a volatile collision between the energy requirements of the future and the infrastructure of the past. As Silicon Valley and the broader digital economy demand an unprecedented surge in power to fuel AI data centers, the administration’s insistence on fossil fuel dependency threatens to decouple U.S. technological growth from global energy trends. By tethering the nation’s high-tech advancement to volatile and carbon-intensive sources, the policy not only undermines climate objectives but introduces significant long-term systemic risks to American economic competitiveness.

While the administration’s energy policies do not directly impact core community concerns like immigration or the flow of remittances, rising energy costs create a significant indirect burden on small businesses. Throughout Little Saigon, the nail salon industry and local phở restaurants are feeling the squeeze as higher utility bills and increased operating expenses drive up overall overhead.