A MAGAn’s Guide to Global Warming

Take into your minds these facts, o red-capped persons sitting in darkness

Photo by Martha Ture

A lifelong friend recently asked whether my assertion that the planet can’t survive another 1,300 days of the Trump administration was an exaggeration. I said that was a good question and I’d look into it, so I did.

First, some background.

1. Which countries are responsible for climate change?

According to Yale Climate Connections, in terms of cumulative historical climate pollution, the United States is responsible for 1.6 times more than China and seven times more than India, despite having one-quarter the population of each country. In terms of per-person climate pollution, the average American today generates 1.8 times more than the average person in China and six times more than the average Indian.

2. What do MAGAns say?

At a 2023 Republican presidential debate, the GOP candidates voiced agreement that climate change is not our problem so much as China and India’s problem.

“If you want to go and really change the environment, then we need to start telling China and India that they have to lower their emissions,” said Nikki Haley, former U.S. ambassador to the United Nations and ultimate runner-up to Donald Trump in the Republican presidential primary race. “We also need to take on the international world and say, ‘OK, India and China, you’ve got to stop polluting.’”

Sen. Tim Scott of South Carolina said “The places where they are continuing to increase [climate pollution] – Africa, 950 million people; India, over a billion; China, over a billion.”

3. What are the facts?

China and India each hold just over 1.4 billion people. Both have rapidly growing economies that largely depend on fossil fuel energy. China is responsible for about one-quarter of annual climate-warming pollution, and together with India, the two countries account for 33% of annual global emissions (the U.S. accounts for about 11%).

But China and India are responsible for much lower per-person and historical climate pollution than many other countries; and crucially, the climate crisis can only be managed internationally.

China accounts for less than 18% of the global population but in 2023 installed 70% of the world’s added wind power capacity, 42% of all solar panels, 32% of all heat pumps, and accounted for 57% of all electric vehicle sales. China is also forecast to account for 44% of the world’s added nuclear power capacity by 2030.

China installed more solar panels in 2023 than the United States has in its entire history. It accounts for almost 60% of new renewable capacity expected to become operational globally over the next five years, and almost two-thirds of global wind and solar projects under construction today are in China. As a result, Chinese climate pollution appears to have now peaked and is poised to decline.

4. In Sum

So: in the 20th century, the United States led the energy transitions to steel, electricity, oil, mass manufacturing, and information technologies. The next transition will be to the age of renewable energy, efficiency, and electrification. But this time, China is poised to lead the new economy.

And now, to address the question, Can the planet survive another 1,300 days of the Trump administration?

Trump’s stance on global warming can be instantiated from his comment: “When people talk about global warming, I say the ocean is going to go down 100th of an inch within the next 400 years. That’s not our problem.”

Since taking office on January 2025, Trump has issued executive orders intended to reverse climate protections.

According to Outlook on Climate Policy Under President Trump's Renewed Mandate, “The second Trump administration could contribute to an increase in greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions by 4 billion tons through 2030 alone, exacerbating risks such as more frequent heatwaves, floods, wildfires, droughts and famine. Additionally, rising air pollution could lead to more deaths and diseases, potentially resulting in $900 million in climate-related damage on a global scale.”

Let’s look at that 4 billion tons number. That’s a lot of greenhouse gas emissions. Where would they come from?

On April 29, ABC News reported that “Several of the 54 executive orders signed on Inauguration Day impacted the environment, including a declaration of a national energy emergency, withdrawing the U.S. from the Paris Agreement for the second time and rolling back drilling restrictions on federal lands and waters.

One example experts cited is the rollback of the social cost of carbon regulation, a policy implemented during the Obama administration, Esty said. This decision could upend energy and environmental regulations designed to address the greenhouse gas emissions that heavily contribute to climate change, he explained.

"The takedown of the social cost of carbon has subtle but pervasive effects that will really damage environmental protection," Esty said.

Another example is Trump's executive order to protect "American energy from state overreach," which contains language that could block enforcement of state and local laws that intervene in the production or use of coal, oil, natural gas, hydropower, geothermal, biofuel and nuclear energy. The order centralizes energy regulation at the federal level and targets policies that restrict carbon emissions, which could further derail decarbonization efforts and roll back clean air and water protections, experts say.

On Monday, the Trump administration dismissed the authors of the Sixth National Climate Assessment report -- the U.S. government's preeminent report on the risks, impacts and responses to climate change mandated by Congress and produced every four years. In an email to the authors, the administration wrote that "the scope of the NCA6 is currently being reevaluated" and officials are "releasing all current assessment participants from their roles."

The "Climate Backtracker," a database started by Columbia University's Sabin Center for Climate Change that tracks steps taken by the Trump administration to scale back or eliminate federal climate mitigation and adaptation measures, lists more than 100 actions taken since Jan. 20.

It will be difficult to reverse the damage done by many of these policies, John Holdren, a professor of environmental science and policy and former science adviser to President Barack Obama, told ABC News.

"You cannot reassemble broken programs very quickly," he said.

Trump also signed an executive order to expand mining and the use of coal in the U.S.

Without doing the arithmetic, let’s assume the 4 billion tons of increased GHG’s is an accurate assessment. What are the effects on Planet Earth of increasing greenhouse gas emissions by 4 billion tons, given that other nations are hard at work reducing their emissions?

Our World In Data provides the answer.

How much CO2 can the world emit while keeping warming below 1.5°C and 2°C?

The budget to keep temperatures below 1.5°C is less than a decade of emissions at current levels. For 2°C, it’s less than three decades.

For a 50% chance of limiting temperatures to 1.5°C, we could emit a further 250 billion tonnes of CO2. But there would still be a 50% chance that we go over this target. If we wanted to be risk-averse – and have an 83% chance of staying below – the world can only emit 100 billion tonnes.

Bar charts showing the amount of CO2 that can be emitted to keep temperature rise below 1.5C and 2C.

What’s clear is how small our remaining budget for 1.5°C is.

The world emitted 41 billion tonnes of CO2 in 2022. To have a 50% chance of staying below 1.5°C, we can only emit 250 billion tonnes. That’s just six years of our current emissions.

The budget for 2°C is significantly larger. For a 50% chance, the world could emit 1150 billion tonnes. That’s around 28 years of current emissions.4 For a two-thirds chance, it’s 23 years.

That might seem more achievable, but the world is currently not on track to achieve this. Current policies have us on course for around 2.5°C of warming. The world needs to reduce emissions much faster to keep temperatures below 2°C.

To substantiate and correlate, the Global Carbon Budget Report projects fossil carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions of 37.4 billion tonnes, up 0.8% from 2023.

Despite the urgent need to cut emissions to slow climate change, the researchers say there is still “no sign” that the world has reached a peak in fossil CO2 emissions.

With projected emissions from land-use change (such as deforestation) of 4.2 billion tonnes, total CO2 emissions are projected to be 41.6 billion tonnes in 2024, up from 40.6 billion tonnes last year.

Over the last 10 years, fossil CO2 emissions have risen while land-use change CO2 emissions have declined on average – leaving overall emissions roughly level over that period.

With over 40 billion tonnes released each year at present, the level of CO2 in the atmosphere continues to rise – driving increasingly dangerous global warming.

Here’s the nut:

China’s emissions (32% of the global total) are projected to marginally increase by 0.2%, although the projected range includes a possible decrease in emissions.

• US emissions (13% of the global total) are projected to decrease by 0.6%.

• India’s emissions (8% of the global total) are projected to increase by 4.6%.

But under the current Trump administration, the forecast is for US emissions to increase by 4 billion tons over the coming 5 years.

So, to answer the question, can the planet survive another 1,300 days of the Trump administration (assuming his environmental policies are not blocked)?

No. The planet can not survive another 1,300 days of the Trump administration.