In May, NASA’s Goddard Laboratory staff were told to work from home. This change came as the Trump administration decided to cancel the lease on their building, a site that has been crucial for climate research since the 1960s. This move was part of a broader plan that aimed to cut the center and halt NASA’s Earth sciences altogether, a proposal that Congress thankfully rejected last year, preventing severe funding cuts.
Since Trump took office, NASA has lost around 4,000 employees, while NOAA (the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration) has seen a reduction of about 880 workers. If the current budget negotiations go through, NOAA could lose another 1,450 jobs due to a proposed $1.6 billion budget cut. NASA also faces a potential 23-24% budget reduction, jeopardizing its climate programs.
Marc Alessi, a researcher at the Union of Concerned Scientists, warns that these changes could set back climate predictions by decades. The loss of data that NOAA and NASA provide, which dates back years, is critical not just for the U.S., but globally. He believes that Congress will push back against these cuts, but warns that the executive branch has been delaying fund releases even when they are approved.
Recently, Trump dismissed 20 independent scientists from the National Science Foundation’s advisory board. This board oversees funding for key research institutions, including the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), vital for climate predictions and global data.
Since January 2026, the U.S. no longer participates in major international climate discussions, such as the IPCC. The budget proposal also suggests halving the Environmental Protection Agency’s budget, which has already lost 4,000 employees and shifted away from reducing greenhouse gas emissions.
Trump often claims that major scientific programs are ideologically biased and exaggerate climate threats, leading many researchers to avoid mentioning “climate change” in their applications for federal funding. Alessi notes a sort of censorship in science, where terms like “extended meteorology” are used instead.
Francisco Doblas, director of the Earth Sciences department at the Barcelona Supercomputing Center, shares concerns about the loss of crucial oceanic observation data from programs like ARGO. This data, which assesses changes in the ocean floor, is heavily reliant on U.S. contributions. Carlo Buontempo, the director of the Copernicus Climate Change program, emphasizes that while European nations have the resources to adapt, losing U.S. satellite data would still be a significant setback.
Despite these challenges, meteorological services continue to function. However, the staffing cuts have hindered their operations, making it harder to carry out essential tasks like launching weather balloons. This affects the ability to predict hurricanes and could have drastic implications. While U.S. scientists face a tough environment, other countries like Europe, Canada, and China remain committed to international climate research.
The struggle over climate science funding highlights both the domestic pressures facing U.S. research and the broader global commitment to addressing climate change. The efforts of scientists must not only persevere but also adapt to this shifting landscape. Understanding these challenges can help foster conversations about the critical importance of science amid political changes.
Source link
trump, wants, to, liquidate, climate, research, by, dismantling, agencies, that, study, phenomena, like, nino
