In a significant move, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) recently canceled a key finding from 2009, which had allowed the government to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. This change ends nearly 17 years of federal policies aimed at combating climate change and will likely lift restrictions on vehicle and industrial emissions.
At a White House event, EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin praised the decision, claiming it would end what he called the “heavy-handed climate policies” of previous administrations. Supporters argue this shift allows automakers to create cars that meet consumer demands rather than pushing electric vehicles alone. Critics, however, see it as a step back in the fight against climate change, highlighting the risks that greenhouse gases pose to public health and the environment.
In the background, conservative and corporate groups have been working for years to challenge the legal foundation of climate regulations. This latest repeal reflects their long-standing objective. While past efforts to overturn the endangerment finding faced legal challenges, this time, officials are moving forward despite scientific warnings about the impact of climate change.
According to a recent report by Climate Central, climate-driven disasters caused about $115 billion in damage in 2025 alone. This statistic underscores the urgency of addressing climate issues. As rising temperatures lead to more severe weather events, experts like Adam Smith from Climate Central stress that investing in climate policies can save money long-term.
Derek Lemoine, an economics professor at the University of Arizona, pointed out that the cost of climate change has already affected Americans, reducing their net income by 12%. He noted that the current administration seems to underestimate the benefits of existing regulations, contrary to robust evidence suggesting those benefits are significant.
The legal battles over climate change regulations aren’t new. In a 2007 Supreme Court case, Massachusetts v. EPA, the court affirmed the agency’s authority to regulate greenhouse gases. However, the recent conservative shift in the Supreme Court may affect future rulings on this issue.
Environmentalists are prepared to challenge this EPA decision in court, arguing that it contradicts established science and disregards the economic and health-related consequences of climate change. As they gear up for this legal showdown, many emphasize that the dangers of fossil fuel emissions are clear, leading to more extreme weather, health issues, and economic costs.
In summary, the repeal of the endangerment finding marks a pivotal moment in U.S. climate policy, stirring debates that will likely continue in the courts and public discourse. With climate disasters increasing in frequency and severity, the consequences of this decision could be felt by Americans for years to come.
Source link
regulation of greenhouse gases under the clean air act, united states environmental protection agency, global environmental issues, natural environment, environmental issues, climate change, climate variability and change, environmental impact of fossil fuels, environmental impact, human impact on the environment, air pollution, clean air act (united states), societal collapse, climate, greenhouse gas, earth sciences, climate change denial
