Environmental (Commonwealth Union)_ In a twisted policy and consequence reversal, the Trump administration’s tough tariff policy, intended to be in the interests of American economics first and foremost, is inadvertently opening up surprising avenues for climate action. As the administration openly taunts climate science and has left behind international compacts, its policies of protectionism are curiously limiting carbon emissions by fundamentally changing global shipping routes and encouraging local repair economies and manufacturing.
The process is straightforward but profound: by imposing tariffs of as much as 50% on imported manufactured goods like washers and dryers, the administration is making domestic equivalents economically attractive. The shift reduces the need for long-distance shipping, a monumental source of global emissions that accounts for 911 million tonnes of COâ‚‚ annually. The figures are full of promise: shipping of electrical machinery alone emitted 12.03 million tonnes in 2023, equivalent to two years’ worth of Atlantic flights between New York and London. Even small reductions in shipping weights and distances can mean a gigantic reduction in emissions for the entire trading regime.
This unexpected climate benefit operates through multiple channels. Firstly, reduced shipping directly cuts fuel consumption and emissions. Second, the economic squeeze created by tariffs induces local repair businesses to grow of significant relevance as California and the EU enact “right to repair” legislation that prevents manufacturers from excluding consumers from their devices. Unlike mass-produced manufacturing, repair work still requires human effort and remains locally anchored, thereby creating domestic employment and reducing the demand for newly shipped goods. Third, reshoring manufacturing, although complex, can lead to more efficient supply chains and reduced transportation emissions.
The phenomenon is a rare example of climate progress from non-climate drivers. The administration’s disdain for environmental policy is well documented, from withdrawing from the Paris Agreement to promoting fossil fuel investment, while its trade policy is inadvertently creating conditions that reduce carbon-intensive shipping. This phenomenon demonstrates the way economic nationalism, despite its isolationist origins, can bring about environmental co-benefits by reducing supply chains and decreasing reliance on long-distance shipping.
However, we must contextualize these benefits. The decreased shipping emissions constitute only one component of the climate equation, and might easily be nullified by what could be even dirtier manufacturing processes if production is shifted to regions with lenient environmental controls. And generally speaking, the climate balance remains in the red taking into account the administration’s outright attack on environmental regulation as well as clean energy incentives. But the unforeseen effects of these tariffs serve to illustrate a vital truth: the carbon intensity of globalization has been hugely exaggerated, and deglobalization, although driven by non-environmental motives, may bring climate dividends.
For climate campaigners, it brings challenge as well as opportunity. While they applaud any reduction in emissions, they must confront the unsettling truth that policies they typically oppose are driving progress. The question then emerges: how can we capitalize on these fortunate events while maintaining our commitment to systematic climate action? While the world economic order is experiencing Trump-induced change, the climate movement must be nimble enough to record and toast beneficial things wherever and from whatever quarters they come.
