On his first day in office, US President Donald Trump declared a national “energy emergency,” signaling a major push to ramp up fossil fuel production in a bid to reduce energy prices. The move has sparked debates about whether increased extraction of oil and gas can effectively lower energy costs for consumers, or whether it could merely benefit the fossil fuel industry at the expense of the environment and long-term energy stability.

A Push for Fossil Fuel Expansion

The US is already the world’s largest producer of oil and gas, and Trump’s energy emergency aims to accelerate this dominance. The declaration allows the fast-tracking of permits for new fossil fuel infrastructure, including oil drilling and gas export facilities. The President has argued that expanding oil and gas production is necessary to tackle high energy prices and prepare for future energy demands driven by emerging technologies, such as data centers.

Critics, however, argue that Trump’s pro-fossil fuel policies are driven by corporate interests. His administration has pushed to dismantle regulations, which it claims have hindered fossil fuel production, thus keeping energy prices high. Environmental advocates, including Dr. Rachel Cleetus of the Union of Concerned Scientists, contend that Trump’s focus on increasing fossil fuel production disregards the negative impacts on the planet and future generations.

Despite these claims, the US is already producing near-record levels of oil and gas. In 2023, the country produced more crude oil than any other nation for the sixth consecutive year. Trump’s policies also include lifting restrictions on natural gas exports, which could further drive up prices if foreign markets, especially in Europe and Asia, offer higher rates.

Can Increased Fossil Fuel Production Actually Lower Prices?

While Trump’s plan to boost fossil fuel production may temporarily lower fuel costs, experts warn that a significant drop in energy prices is unlikely. The cost of oil extraction for many companies is around $45 to $50 per barrel, and with oil prices currently around $75 per barrel, any drastic cut in prices could leave companies unable to make a profit. As a result, reduced production would cause prices to rise again, leading to a volatile “boom and bust” cycle in the market.

Moreover, energy prices are influenced by more than just the cost of fossil fuels. Around 40% of the final price is tied to distribution and transmission costs. This means that simply increasing fuel supply will not solve the underlying issues of grid capacity or outdated infrastructure. As Abigail Dillen of Earthjustice points out, Trump’s policies may increase industry profits but do little to lower energy costs for everyday consumers.

Trump’s goal of reducing energy prices by 50% is particularly ambitious. A 19% drop in energy costs in 2020—due to reduced energy consumption during the COVID-19 pandemic—demonstrated how fragile the relationship between supply and price can be. Ultimately, the long-term stability of the energy market depends on a more sustainable and diversified approach, rather than an over-reliance on fossil fuels.

Conclusion

Trump’s energy emergency and his focus on expanding fossil fuel production are unlikely to lead to lasting reductions in energy prices. While increased supply may offer short-term relief, the broader challenges of energy infrastructure, global demand, and market dynamics suggest that his policies could ultimately serve the interests of the fossil fuel industry more than those of American consumers or the environment.