Am I the only one who feels like 2025 is becoming one of those years? You know the type where you think, “Okay, well it can’t get any worse than this…” Surprise! It can.

For green demand, 2025 certainly feels like this. Mainly because of three macroeconomic events: EU climate regulation rollbacks, Trump re-entering the White House, and tariff wars.

The big question is, are these events enough to dismantle all the progress we’ve made towards sustainability, or has green demand reached an unstoppable momentum? Right now, I’m seeing the latter.

Recap: EU rollbacks, Trump, and tariffs

So what are these green seismic waves? At the beginning of April, the EU parliament adopted the EU Omnibus. The package has proposed significant rollbacks on the scope of the EU Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive (CSRD). So far, the first wave of reports has been delayed by two years. For sustainability teams, it creates yet more uncertainty.

Meanwhile, across the Atlantic, President Trump entered the White House. His stance on climate change is clear. (Our should I say, “what climate change?”)

Almost instantly, climate-related terms were purged from the official government website. The Global Change Research Program which helps shape environmental rules, legislation and infrastructure projects in the wake of climate disruption is being dismantled. And judges from across the US are battling climate-related rollbacks.

Finally, the biggest economic shake-up is tariff wars. Stock markets around the world are in flux as countries retaliate against Trump’s tariffs. The global market crashed and partially recovered. But most importantly, the uncertainty means that businesses can't properly plan or make decisions

Turbulent barely covers it. However, a seismic change in global trade is clearly underway. As companies prioritise heightened costs, will sustainability be forced to take a back seat?

Is green demand dwindling?

No. And honestly, I am shocked to be saying it. Despite regulation rollbacks, the White House turning against it, and tariffs throwing the world into turmoil, the green flame continues to burn.

If all this can’t extinguish green demand, then can anything?

The value of climate reporting has already been realised

Businesses are shifting from reporting to actual decarbonisation.

The delay of EU climate regulation came too late. I’ve heard from the climate team at one of the world’s biggest asset management companies that they’re so far gone with EU CSRD implementation, they’re going to finish it anyway. Over 300 companies have already published their reports. They already see the value.

And so do shareholders. Investors worth $6.8trn pushed back against the rollbacks. To them, climate risk is financial risk.

In 2024, economic loss from natural disasters hit $368B — 14% higher than the 21st century average. In the same year, 20 countries logged record temperatures. Investors want climate disclosures to make informed investment decisions.

Urgency for moving to reducing, rather than just reporting, emissions has never been higher.

US companies pick the green side

You’d think having a President who said “Drill baby drill” would flip the climate switch in the US. But the result is mass greenhushing. Companies see value in aligning in prioritising people, planet, and profit.

The Science-based Target initiative (SBTi) is the gold standard of climate reporting. Of the 11,066 companies committed to aligning their operations with their initiative, 11.5% are based in the US. This includes giants like 3M, Adobe, and Uber.

Only 94, out of a thousand US companies, have had their commitment removed. While the White House has turned its back on the planet, companies have not.

The opportunity to align the global trade playbook

Trump's tariffs will inevitably force companies to rewrite their supply chains. Procurement teams will have to switch suppliers, buyers will be inspecting vendors, and logistics will reroute shipments. This is an opportunity.

Everything is about to get more expensive, so these teams will be optimising for costs. If you’re evaluating your supply chain anyway, why not make sustainability part of your decision-making criteria?

The majority assume that the greenest option is always the most expensive option. It’s simply not true. Renewable energy is cheaper than fossil fuels. Ocean freight is cheaper than air freight. Companies estimate that tackling supply chain climate risks generates potential financial gains of $165 billion, while companies cutting their Scope 3 emissions have already saved $13.6 billion in costs.

This is why we need emissions data to be readily available — so procurement, supply chain, and logistics managers can make informed decisions. If you have to reoptimise your supply chain for costs, you might as well optimise it for emissions.

The green opportunity in 2025

I genuinely believe we’ve surpassed the tipping point. If green demand has survived regulation rollbacks, Trump, and tariff wars, then it’s inevitable.

What I’m seeing is an opportunity for companies to rewrite the playbook. To make informed green decisions, climate-align supply chains, and smoothly transition to a low carbon economy. And I believe emissions intelligence is critical to that journey.

For more insights into green demand, subscribe to Lune's newsletter.