This post was originally published on here
President Donald Trump revoked the scientific finding that climate change endangers human health and the environment on Thursday, sparking alarm among scientists and environmentalists.
The finding, a 2009 government declaration determining that carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare, has been central to U.S. policies on regulating emissions and fighting climate change.
Without it, all greenhouse gas emission standards for vehicles and engines from 2012 onwards are eliminated, as well as other climate regulations on power plants and oil and gas facilities.
There were reports that the call for the landmark action came from the head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Lee Zeldin, although the EPA did not confirm the validity of the claim when approached by the Associated Press.
The EPA told Newsweek that it eliminated “trillions of dollars in regulations with the recission of the 2009 Endangerment Finding and the subsequent greenhouse gas emission standards.” The agency said the move would save American taxpayers over $1.3 trillion, as well as an average cost savings of over $2,400 per vehicle.
“EPA’s historic move restores consumer choice, makes more affordable vehicles available for American families, and decreases the cost of living on all products by lowering the cost of trucks,” the agency said.
However, scientists are concerned.
“What must be remembered is that every contribution of U.S. greenhouse gas emissions to the atmospheric total—as with every contribution everywhere—is a net negative for well-being everywhere,” John Holdren, a professor of environmental science and policy at Harvard University, told Newsweek.
“That’s because global climate change itself is directly damaging economies, property, ecosystems, and human health and safety,” he added.
Why It Matters
Trump has made his views on climate change clear, deeming it a “hoax.” The move also comes following Trump’s support for the expansion of coal and oil industries, such as his “drill, baby, drill” campaign, and signals the administration is continuing to focus its efforts on expanding American energy supply over addressing worldwide environmental concerns.
The United States is the second-largest carbon polluter in the world after China, according to EPA’s own data, and is also the largest historical emitter of greenhouse gases, according to the news outlet Carbon Brief. According to the Rhodium Group, an independent research body, the U.S. emitted 11 percent of the world’s greenhouse gases in 2021.
It is likely that with climate change regulations revoked, these markers will rise in the coming years.
According to the Center for Biological Diversity, a nonprofit organization, the move would also scrap rules that would have cut 7 billion metric tons of emissions and save the average American driver $6,000 in fuel and maintenance costs over the lifetimes of the vehicles made under the standards.
What To Know
While Trump said during the announcement that the 2009 endangerment finding “had no basis in fact, had none whatsoever, and it had no basis in law,” the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in 2007 that greenhouse gases are air pollutants that can be regulated under the Clean Air Act, which was what prompted the adoption of the rule in 2009.
The finding determined that six long-lived greenhouse gases should in combination be defined as “air pollution” under the Clean Air Act and that it is reasonable to predict they endanger the health and welfare of current and future generations. It then became an essential, legal basis for the regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.
However, the Trump EPA has told Newsweek that it has now found “even if the U.S. were to eliminate all [greenhouse gas] emissions from vehicles it would not result in any material impact on global climate indicators.”
“Therefore, maintaining [greenhouse gas] emission standards is not necessary for EPA to fulfill its core mission of protecting human health and the environment, but regardless, it is not within the authority Congress entrusted to EPA,” the agency added.
“The Trump EPA is committed to fulfilling our core mission of protecting human health and the environment. It is this mission that drives every action and rulemaking this agency takes.”
This essentially means that the Trump EPA “isn’t denying that climate change is happening or that fossil fuels are the chief cause,” Michael B. Gerrard, a professor of professional practice and director of the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law at Columbia University, told Newsweek.
“Instead they are saying that whatever the U.S. does now will not make enough of a difference to warrant the expense to Americans,” he said. “The U.S. is historically the largest emitter of greenhouse gases, and is abdicating its responsibility.”
Barry Rabe, a professor emeritus of environmental policy at the University of Michigan told Newsweek that the move confirms the administration’s energy policy “will eschew technologies such as wind and solar and instead bet that our energy future is based on more traditional sources such as coal, gas, oil, and possibly nuclear.”
What People Are Saying
Drew Shindell, a professor of earth sciences at Duke University, told Newsweek: “Put another way, when you’re denying climate science more strongly than the American Petroleum Institute, a longtime supporter of denialism that has spoken against this removal, you know you’re extreme. The Administration is simply wrong. They could similarly declare the Earth is flat but that also wouldn’t make it so.”
John Holdren, a professor of environmental science and policy at Harvard University, told Newsweek: “Thursday’s repeal of the Endangerment Finding is scientifically unfounded, almost certainly illegal, and unbelievably unwise. But it is only part of a wide-ranging Trump administration assault on regulations of all kinds and an even broader war on science, data, fact-based decision-making, and public understanding of what is going on.”
Dan Becker, director of the Center for Biological Diversity’s Safe Climate Transport Campaign said in a statement: “The EPA is killing the biggest single step any nation has taken to save oil, save consumers money at the pump, and combat global warming. American families will suffer long-term harms so that giant auto and oil companies can pocket short-term profits.
He added: “Rescinding the endangerment finding will make it harder for federal agencies to take steps to cut heat-trapping greenhouse gas pollution from cars, trucks, power plants, factories and agriculture. This lawless decision was precooked to benefit polluters. Trump is giving his Big Oil and Big Auto toadies a giant gift while the rest of us get more extreme storms, heart disease and asthma.”
U.S. Senator for New York and the Senate Democratic Leader Chuck Schumer wrote in a post on X: “The Trump EPA has abandoned its duty to protect the American people from greenhouse gas pollution and climate change devastation. As climate change drives up insurance premiums, grocery prices, energy costs, and health care spending, American families will be left holding the bill.”
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin said in a statement: “The Endangerment Finding has been the source of 16 years of consumer choice restrictions and trillions of dollars in hidden costs for Americans. Referred to by some as the ‘Holy Grail’ of the ‘climate change religion,’ the Endangerment Finding is now eliminated. The Trump EPA is strictly following the letter of the law, returning commonsense to policy, delivering consumer choice to Americans and advancing the American Dream. As EPA Administrator, I am proud to deliver the single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history on behalf of American taxpayers and consumers. As an added bonus, the off-cycle credit for the almost universally despised start-stop feature on vehicles has been removed.”
What Happens Next
Trump’s revoking of the rule is likely to be met with legal challenges.
“Since the EPA is required to make rules based on consideration of the scientific evidence, I cannot see how this could possibly stand up in court,” Shindell told Newsweek.
He added that the move was “based entirely on the desire of conservative activists to forbid the government from enacting regulations limiting fossil fuels and is wholly inconsistent with scientific evidence.”
“I expect this to take years to progress through the courts but it would undermine the rule of law were this action to stand given the overwhelming scientific evidence that climate change does in fact endanger the health of Americans,” Shindell said.
