The Trump administration made a big move by revoking federal climate regulations. This decision weakens the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) power to safeguard our environment and health.
Back in 2009, the EPA decided that greenhouse gases harm public health. A lot of scientific research has shown that these gases lead to extreme weather, like heatwaves and storms. Under President Obama, the EPA concluded that the dangers posed by greenhouse gases meant the government had to step in and regulate them. This was called the “endangerment finding.” In recent years, climate scientist Zeke Hausfather emphasized that our understanding of climate change is even stronger now than it was in 2009. He argues there’s no scientific reason for repealing this finding.
The Trump administration’s rollback targets major sources of climate pollution: transportation and power plants. Together, they create over half of the U.S.’s greenhouse gas emissions, significant contributors to climate change.
Experts warn that removing climate standards will have serious consequences for our health and economy. Air pollution from burning fossil fuels leads to about 100,000 premature deaths each year, exceeding deaths from accidents and homicides combined. Some argue that the government’s claims about increased costs from vehicle regulations neglect the savings from reduced fuel bills and environmental benefits. In fact, the Biden administration projected that its vehicle regulations could provide around $1 trillion in benefits over three decades.
Interestingly, public opinion is largely against these rollbacks. According to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, a vast majority of Americans support regulating carbon dioxide emissions, reflecting a consistent trend across the country.
Environmental groups are expected to challenge these changes legally. They caution that the rapid action taken by the Trump administration could allow the courts to limit future government efforts to combat climate change. Jody Freeman, a legal expert, pointed out that the administration is pushing to remove regulatory authority entirely, which is more drastic than previous administrations.
This could potentially backfire on fossil fuel companies. Recent reports indicate that the administration’s actions might weaken their defense against lawsuits related to climate change. If the EPA asserts it no longer has authority over greenhouse gases, it could complicate efforts by oil companies to dismiss state-level climate claims.
Overall, the shift in climate policy raises concerns about public health and environmental protection, and it shows a growing divide between governmental actions and public sentiment. As this situation unfolds, it will be crucial to monitor its impact on both our health and legal battles over climate action.
For more on the public’s views on climate regulation, visit the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.
Source link
federal,government,United States
