Trump's 100-Day Energy Policy Scorecard: Disrupted Markets and Slowed Investment
So much for unleashing American energy.
The first 100 days of President Donald Trump's second term have been tumultuous and marred by abhorrent trade strategies and legally dubious immigration policies. Trump's first 100 days have also disrupted energy markets and sparked uncertainty among energy producers.
Trump has used his first 100 days to advance his fossil fuel energy agenda through executive fiat. On Day 1, the president signed a slew of executive orders, including one declaring a national energy emergency and another to unleash American energy, particularly "oil, natural gas, coal, hydropower, biofuels, critical mineral, and nuclear energy resources." Trump has also signed orders challenging states' climate laws, propping up coal—an energy source that the private sector is moving away from—and using wartime emergency powers to increase the federal government's role in critical mineral production.
As the president has used the power of the pen to spur favored industries, he has used executive orders to hamstring renewable energy sources. After promising "to have a policy where no windmills are being built," Trump signed an executive order halting offshore wind farm development. The Trump administration has since shuttered two previously permitted offshore wind energy projects in New York and New Jersey.
While many of Trump's moves are concerning for anyone in favor of small government, the president has taken steps to reduce the regulatory bloat of the federal government. Trump's Day 1 executive orders directed federal agencies to identify and streamline regulations that inhibit energy development. The Trump White House has proposed streamlining environmental reviews under the National Environmental Policy Act, which has become a bureaucratic impediment to energy and infrastructure projects since its passage in 1969.
In March, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) unleashed what it called the "Biggest Deregulatory Action in U.S. History." Under the direction of EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, the agency began taking 31 deregulatory actions, including scrapping the Biden administration's tailpipe emissions rule (a de facto electric vehicle mandate). While some of these regulatory actions may pass legal muster, the proposed reconsideration of the endangerment finding—which allows the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act—has been called a "fool's errand" by The Volokh Conspiracy's Jonathan H. Adler.
Most recently, the Interior Department proposed an accelerated timeline for approving energy projects on federal lands to comply with Trump's national energy emergency. Under the new framework, the permitting process for fossil fuel, mining, critical mineral, and geothermal projects will take 28 days, instead of several years.
Deregulating energy production through executive-level actions instead of legislation passed by Congress could invite legal challenges and prevent these changes from taking effect. The Interior Department's permitting guidelines, for instance, are sure "to be tested in the courts," James Coleman, a law professor at the University of Minnesota, told E&E News. "I expect that lots of courts are going to strike down actions just given the unprecedented scope."
Despite the president's steps to open up oil and gas development, the industry has seen a turbulent 100 days under Trump. The president's back-and-forth trade policies have sparked industry-wide uncertainty and sent oil prices tumbling.
In March, the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas released its quarterly survey of 130 energy firms in the 11th Federal Reserve District, which includes the heavy-energy-producing regions of Texas, northern Louisiana, and southern New Mexico. "I have never felt more uncertainty about our business in my entire 40-plus-year career," said one survey respondent. "The administration's chaos is a disaster for the commodity markets. 'Drill, baby, drill' is nothing short of a myth and populist rallying cry," added another.
Already in decline since Trump's inauguration, the price of oil plummeted after the president announced his "Liberation Day" tariffs. With costs hovering around $62 per barrel of oil because of these duties and increased drilling from OPEC+, projects are becoming less profitable, which is leading some companies to reduce production. Dallas-based energy firm Matador Resources has pared back its drilling plans for the year, while oil companies in Canada (which provides 60 percent of America's crude oil imports) are shifting production to natural gas.
Trump's trade war has also damped the market outlook for nuclear power. While not an energy source that has received as much attention from the president as coal, oil, and natural gas, the Trump administration has dispersed federal financing to a nuclear power plant restart in Michigan. Looming tariffs are forcing Hyundai, one of the project's construction partners, to look to domestic manufacturers. "Tariffs will have an influence on the total price," a spokesperson for Hyundai told Bloomberg.
Nearly $8 billion worth of other clean energy projects were canceled or downsized in the first quarter of 2025 because of Trump's tariffs and federal funding freezes. The Commerce Department recently slapped duties as high as 3,521 percent on Asian solar imports after a yearslong trade investigation. While the announcement may benefit domestic manufacturers, it is sure to slow down the deployment of solar panels in the United States.
Trump promised to unleash American energy. However, the president's heavy-handed, protectionist approach to trade and domestic production in his first 100 days could end up setting American energy back.
