How will Trump's 'big, beautiful' bill affect climate change?

RICHMOND, Virginia - President Donald Trump's 'big, beautiful' budget bill, which seeks to roll back climate and clean energy-related provisions, passed the U.S. Senate on Tuesday and now heads back to the House of Representatives for its consideration.

The Trump administration has called the bill "transformative" and said it will head off looming tax hikes and unleash "clean, American-made energy."

But environmental advocates worry the package could hurt the United States' efforts to combat climate change and curb the use of clean energy in the world's second-largest emitter of greenhouse gases, behind China.

The House is expected to consider the bill as soon as Wednesday. Here's what to know:

What is happening to the bill?

U.S. Senate Republicans passed Trump's massive spending bill on Tuesday by a razor-thin margin, advancing a package that would extend expiring tax cuts, cut the social safety net and boost immigration enforcement spending while adding an estimated $3.3 trillion to the national debt.

The bill is now in the hands of the House of Representatives, but some Republicans there have already expressed opposition to some of the Senate provisions.

The bill is seeking to repeal many of former President Joe Biden's green energy incentives, including some in his signature climate bill called the Inflation Reduction Act.

The budget bill would also reduce spending on the Medicaid health program and food aid for low-income Americans.

Trump wants to sign the bill into law by the July 4 Independence Day holiday.

What are the major clean energy provisions under consideration?

The Senate had been considering a new excise tax on renewable energy as part of the budget bill but lawmakers dropped the proposed tax before passing the broader legislation.

Despite this, Republican lawmakers are seeking to unwind some tax credits - or tax breaks - for renewable energy that had been included in the Inflation Reduction Act, passed in 2022 during Biden's administration.

These tax credits include breaks for "clean" vehicles and energy-efficient homes, among others.

The bill also attempts to roll back funding for a program intended to help oil and natural gas producers cut methane emissions, among other provisions.

The bill passed by the Senate will make it "much, much harder to build new clean energy projects," said Joanna Slaney, vice president for political and government affairs for the Environmental Defense Fund (EDF), an advocacy group.

"It's clear that this deeply unpopular bill favors burning more fossil fuels while ignoring the damage it will do to people's lives," Slaney said.

The oil and gas industry, meanwhile, is praising the legislation, which could expedite new potential lease sales tied to fossil fuel projects. The bill directs the Secretary of the Interior to resume quarterly onshore oil and gas lease sales, which were limited under Biden.

"This historic legislation will help usher in a new era of energy dominance by unlocking opportunities for investment, opening lease sales and expanding access to oil and natural gas development," said Mike Sommers, CEO and President of the American Petroleum Institute (API).

What else are environmental advocates saying about the bill?

Despite the removal of the excise tax, the bill "is still devastating for the clean energy transition," said Gretchen Goldman, President of the Union of Concerned Scientists, a non-profit group.

"The provisions attacking clean energy and clean transportation are not about the budget, but rather Congress using the budget bill to boost fossil fuels by crushing these booming new industries," Goldman said.

Clean energy advocates have warned that the rollbacks will ultimately raise electricity prices for American consumers.

"It will only exacerbate the growing strain on the electric grid," said Steven Nadel, executive director of the American Council for an Energy-Efficient Economy (ACEEE), a non-profit research group.

"And the bill goes out of its way to encourage automakers to produce inefficient cars that are costly to fuel."

(Reporting by David Sherfinski; Editing by Ana Nicolaci da Costa.)