Since the new Trump administration took office, a notable shift in corporate climate policies has emerged in the United States and Canada. This trend, meticulously tracked by InfluenceMap, reveals how major companies are recalibrating their environmental commitments, potentially undermining global climate goals.
In the energy sector, TotalEnergies, led by CEO Patrick Pouyanne, has signalled a strategic pivot towards expanding its US liquefied natural gas (LNG) investments. In a February 2025 interview with Reuters, Pouyanne underscored the necessity of infrastructure investments to bolster gas delivery, expressing optimism about the Trump administration’s support for energy production. Pouyanne’s advocacy for increased LNG exports and his critique of EU carbon taxes highlight a focus on economic pragmatism that could overshadow environmental concerns. This stance risks entrenching fossil fuel dependencies at a critical juncture for climate action.
Meanwhile, the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers (CAPP), under President Lisa Baiton, has been a vocal proponent of increased oil and gas production. In a February 2025 press release, Baiton lauded the tariff pause on Canadian energy, emphasising North America’s potential as an energy superpower. Baiton’s call for expanded energy trade and production frames the issue as a matter of economic and geopolitical strength. However, this approach, which is dependent on fossil fuels, could hinder the transition to renewable energy sources, exacerbating climate challenges.
In the transport sector, General Motors (GM), under CEO Mary Barra, has adopted a new, demand-oriented approach to vehicle electrification. In a January 2025 statement, Barra indicated that GM would align production with consumer demand, hinting at a potential ramp-up of internal combustion engine (ICE) vehicles if EV demand falters.
Similarly, Ford Motor, led by CEO Jim Farley, has maintained an ambiguous stance on road transport electrification. In a December 2024 interview, Farley acknowledged potential policy changes under the then-incoming administration but stopped short of committing to specific EV initiatives. Farley’s emphasis on Ford’s US market presence and diverse vehicle portfolio suggests a wait-and-see approach.
In the heavy vehicles sector, the Clean Freight Coalition (CFC), an alliance of truck transportation stakeholders which enjoys the support of the Volvo Group and Daimler Trucks North America, opposed the Clean Trucks Partnership (CTP) agreement in a joint letter dated January 2025, and advocated for technology-neutral emissions standards, arguing that current regulations create industry disruption and uncertainty. The CFC’s resistance to ambitious decarbonisation targets, reflects a broader industry preference for an increasingly gradual transition that considers current operational and economic realities, which could slow the adoption of zero-emission heavy-duty vehicles.
Although not definitive, recent statements by global corporations, many of them European, seem to indicate a new trend in global transport and decarbonisation policy; gone are the days where sustainability was an objective in itself, and at the top of the agenda. Instead, private undertakings are now publicly prioritising economic considerations over environmental sustainability, risking long-term fossil fuel dependencies and reduced climate action just as the world’s temperature averages 1.4 degrees higher than pre-industrial levels.
