Since Donald Trump returned to office, his administration has made significant moves against climate action and environmental protection. It has rolled back key parts of the Inflation Reduction Act, canceled clean energy projects, and halted crucial climate research. Many observers feel this rollback threatens the future of America’s environmental policies.
One major change comes from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which plans to stop evaluating the health benefits of regulations aimed at reducing air pollution. This decision follows the U.S. withdrawal from important international climate organizations, including the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change.
For years, calculating the number of lives saved by pollution regulations was a standard practice, enjoyed bipartisan support. Marshall Burke, a Stanford professor, highlights how these analyses were important for understanding the economic and health impacts of regulations.
Burke notes, “Decades ago, the push for these analyses was largely Republican. Now, the administration seems to ignore these benefits altogether.”
Removing these evaluations will likely make it easier to relax regulations that currently save lives, benefiting companies in the fossil fuel sector, including coal and oil industries. The Biden administration had projected that stricter regulations would prevent thousands of premature deaths and save hundreds of thousands of work hours annually.
The EPA claims that not monetizing health impacts does not equate to disregarding them. However, critics like Princeton professor Michael Oppenheimer argue this move undermines the government’s ability to effectively regulate pollution. In the U.S., about 135,000 people die prematurely each year from air pollution.
Oppenheimer emphasizes the importance of America participating in global climate leadership, stating, “If we pull back, it’s an opportunity for countries like China to take the lead.” He points out that China is at the forefront of clean energy technologies, becoming a major player in solar, wind, and electric vehicle production.
As the U.S. steps back from international climate initiatives, other countries are moving forward. Oppenheimer warns that this lack of transparency in global efforts can pose problems. Burke agrees and stresses the urgency of America reclaiming its leadership role, stating, “We risk a worse climate future and missing out on economic opportunities.”
The consequences of these policies are not just environmental. They can lead to health issues and economic setbacks for America. Oppenheimer concludes that the current trajectory may lead the U.S. to become increasingly dependent on fossil fuels rather than embracing future energy solutions.
As the rest of the world advances towards a cleaner, more sustainable future, the question remains: how will the U.S. adapt and respond to these challenges in the years to come?
Source link
Climate Change,Environmental Protection Agency,Pollution
