How the Trump Administration’s Reversal of a Key Scientific Finding Could Impact Oregonians: Serious Consequences Ahead

Oregon officials are concerned about a recent decision to revoke a key scientific finding that has helped curb carbon emissions from transportation since 2009. This move could have serious consequences for Oregonians, particularly regarding air quality and public health.

The Oregon Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ) expressed these worries in comments submitted to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Gov. Tina Kotek emphasized that the decision is not just political; it’s based on solid scientific evidence recognized by the Supreme Court. She warned this change could jeopardize Oregon’s climate efforts and heighten risks from air pollution, especially in communities near busy roads.

The EPA’s announcement in July to revoke the “endangerment finding” has alarmed many. This finding was crucial for setting stricter greenhouse gas emissions standards under the Clean Air Act. It identified several greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide and methane, as major threats to public health. Since its implementation in 2010, it has guided policies to reduce emissions.

If the revocation is finalized, the government may roll back all regulations for motor vehicles, saying it wants to give consumers more choices. However, critics argue this could undo years of progress. The Trump administration has already dismantled various climate policies and funding aimed at promoting renewable energy.

Gerik Kransky, a senior advisor at DEQ, pointed out that the transportation sector contributes 35% of Oregon’s greenhouse gas emissions. The state relies on federal standards for programs like the Climate Protection Program and the Oregon Clean Fuels Program to reduce these emissions. Reversing the endangerment finding threatens these efforts and public health, particularly for vulnerable groups like children and the elderly, who face higher risks of asthma and heart disease due to air pollution.

Kransky emphasized that the scientific evidence has only strengthened since the endangerment finding was made. Advanced, cost-effective technologies are available to help cut pollution. Removing these regulations, he argues, would likely worsen health risks in Oregon and make climate-related disasters more frequent.

According to recent data, 85% of Oregonians believe the state should focus on reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Public sentiment strongly leans toward an environmentally responsible approach.

In short, this decision could compromise the health of Oregonians and the state’s climate goals. It’s crucial for regulators to continue prioritizing evidence-based policies to safeguard both public health and the environment.

For more information, check out the EPA’s statement on the revocation.

Source link

Science & Environment | Carbon | Environment | Politics