Could Trump’s tariffs prove good for the environment?

In his first months in office, President Donald Trump has imposed 25% tariffs on Mexican and Canadian imports – with some exemptions – as well as a 20% levy on all Chinese goods. On March 12, 2025, Trump also introduced a 25% tariff on steel and aluminium imports from all countries, prompting retaliatory measures from Canada and the EU, which announced tariffs on US goods, including a 50% levy on American bourbon whiskey.

In response to, in Trump’s own words, this “nasty” tariff on whiskey, tee-total President Trump threatened to impose 200% tariffs on wine and other alcoholic products from EU countries. Trump’s threats to introduce tough tariffs on his return to the White House have come with dizzying speed. The global trade war is heating up, with significant impacts for all economies. Most recently, the UK and other big car-producing nations are concerned about big incoming tariffs on automobiles and steel.  

And, according to recent studies, Trump’s tariffs will hit the economy of the US as well as the countries he’s targeting. Researchers from the London School of Economics and Political Sciences estimated that the levies could result in a gross domestic product (GDP) decline of 0.64% in the US, 0.68% in China, and 0.11% in the EU. 

These numbers have triggered shocked reactions worldwide. Canada’s outgoing prime minister Justin Trudeau accused Trump of orchestrating “a total collapse of the Canadian economy”, while his recent successor Mark Carney has vehemently condemned Trump’s “unjustified tariffs”, and surged in the polls, stealing the votes of pro-Trump conservative candidates. 

Canada’s retaliatory tariffs on American whiskey are just one shot in these skirmishes which could become the biggest trade war of modern times. Canada has introduced an additional 25% tariff on US goods including sports equipment, computers, and cast iron items, while the EU has imposed tariffs on US goods ranging from boats and motorbikes to pipes, window frames and tin foil. 

While European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen declared that she “deeply regrets this measure” because tariffs are “bad for business and worse for consumers”, retaliatory tariffs seem the only parry to a threatened European economy.

Similarly, Mexico President Claudia Sheinbaum promised to respond to Trump’s tariffs with “tariff and non-tariff measures”, and declared that the American levies had “no justification”.

To put it simply: tariffs disrupt global trade. However, one side effect not much yet discussed, is the potential to massively reduce demand for international shipping and transportation, a major contributor to global pollution. 

While being widely criticised for rolling back environmental regulations, pulling the US out of the Paris Climate Accord, and championing fossil fuel industries – Trump may have accidentally implemented an economic policy with significant environmental benefits. 

Though rooted in protectionism and economic self-interest, Trump’s tariffs could shorten supply chains and reduce the massive carbon footprint associated with a highly globalised manufacturing and distribution network.

Shipping

Transnational shipping accounts for roughly 3% of human-induced global emissions, with approximately 1,000 million metric tons of CO₂ emitted by maritime transport per year. To give an idea of how big that is, 1,000 million metric tons of CO₂ would weigh as much as 200 million elephants (roughly 400 times the actual number of elephants left!). 

And according to the International Maritime Organisation, shipping emissions are predicted to increase by up to 50% by 2050 – a significant contributor to climate change.  

Air pollution from ships can also affect the health of the 30% of the global population that lives within 50km of a coast. Additionally, underwater noise and pollution events such as oil spills can have enormous effects on marine life, creating stress and inducing behavioural changes.

And finally, untreated ballast water, necessary for the safe operation of ships, can introduce new species from one marine ecosystem to another, altering the balance of marine habitats and threatening the species that inhabit them. 

Trump claims his tariffs exist to incentivise U.S. domestic manufacturing. In the last couple of years, the US invested over $126 billion in clean industrial production. Greener, sustainable technologies and methods of manufacturing, could mean less pollution, since more modern U.S. factories would produce goods locally using shorter supply chains. 

And while many of China’s factories still rely on electricity produced by burning coal, the US energy grid is increasingly shifting towards renewables like wind, solar, and natural gas, with lower carbon footprints. 

According to the US Energy Information Administration, US solar power generation will experience a 75% increase between 2023 and 2025, from 163 billion kilowatt-hours (kWh) in 2023 to 286 billion kWh in 2025. 

Their analysis also points out that US wind power generation is predicted to grow by 11% from 430 billion kWh in 2023 to 476 billion kWh in 2025. 

Europe is continuously investing in sustainable development as well. According to the European Commission, wind and solar renewable energy production capacity increased by over 25% between 2020 and 2022, from roughly 320 to 400 Gigawatt (GW). 

Additionally, Europe conferred 4.5. million green jobs in 2019, a 1.3 million increase from 2000, and invested over €100 billion to create the Net-Zero Industry Act, an initiative aimed at expanding the EU’s manufacturing capacity for technologies that enable the clean energy transition and produce little to no greenhouse gas emission – or even remove them.

It’s impossible to talk about world trade without considering China. Despite its latest efforts to introduce sustainable plans to improve the manufacturing sector, the country is still highly dependent on ecologically damaging practices. 

Fast Fashion

Let’s take a look at a truly global industry, fast fashion, where China is a leading producer. According to the UN Environment Programme, fast fashion – a term used to represent cheap, trendy clothing that replicates higher end fashion trends – is the second-largest consumer of water among all consumer industries, with 2.65 litres of water needed to produce one cotton shirt and 7.57 litres for a pair of jeans. 

Additionally, fast fashion is responsible for an alarming 10% of global carbon emissions – more than all international flights and maritime shipping combined!

Trump’s protectionist policies will hit this sector too. He suspended an exemption that allowed low value products to be imported in the US duty-free, highly affecting cheap, fast fashion imports. But these are early days and there is as yet no consensus on how all this will affect supply chains within the fashion industry. 

According to Lucy Tammam, creative director of sustainable clothing brand Tammam, US levies will make fast fashion products more expensive, on par with locally made, higher-quality alternatives. But Juozas Kaziukenas, founder of e-commerce intelligence firm Marketplace Pulse, believes fast fashion products will still remain cheap and won’t be heavily affected by tariffs, and similarly, Meg Pirie, Head of Sustainability and Regeneration Policy at Fashion Roundtable, believes fast fashion brands will easily absorb any additional costs.  

It’s a delicate balancing act with worldwide implications. But let’s not forget that the man driving all this, as 45^th and 47^th President Donald J. Trump, has never been a cheerleader for the global movement to limit climate change...and he’s given no reason for us to believe that will ever change. If global emissions do go down though, he will certainly take the credit.