Dangerous Times
Rollback of federal climate policy "Endangers" us all
According to the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication, most Americans understand the science behind global climate change and feel that the government should enact policy designed to help adapt to and mitigate climate change. As climate-related disasters, wildfires, and extreme heat cause property loss, loss of life, and increase property insurance premiums nationwide, Americans of all political persuasions cannot help but notice the increasing impacts climate change is having on daily life.
Despite growing public support for federal government action on climate, the current administration seeks to expand oil and gas operations and downplay the scientific consensus around climate change. Current US EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin commented that the EPA would “drive a dagger straight into the heart of climate change religion.”
As a major part of that effort, the EPA has announced that it will consider rolling back the foundational Endangerment Finding, which finds that greenhouse gas emissions endanger the health and welfare of the public. The Endangerment Finding, which forms the legal basis for a significant portion of federal greenhouse gas regulations, gives the EPA the authority to regulate emissions of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act.
The Clean Air Act creates a regulatory framework which requires states to monitor and regulate the concentrations of six criteria pollutants which cause a risk to public health. Pollutants like ozone and oxides of nitrogen and particulate matter come from industrial processes and tailpipe emissions from cars and trucks. These traditional air pollutants have a direct impact on human health by affecting the lungs and cardiovascular systems, putting vulnerable groups like the very young, the elderly, and those with respiratory conditions at risk. Criteria pollutants also worsen smog and decrease visibility in cities and areas downstream from urban areas, like National Parks.
Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases affect human health in a different way than traditional air pollutants. Emissions of greenhouse gases cause climate change, which causes an increase in extreme heat, drought, and worsening natural disasters that affect public health and welfare in significant and lasting ways. In other words, criteria pollutants affect public health in the short term and greenhouse gases affect public health in the long term. The effects of climate change are arguably more significant and long-lasting than the effects of traditional air pollution, but it is important to regulate both, for the benefit of the health and welfare of the public.
To support reconsideration of the Endangerment Finding, the Department of Energy released a report called “A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate” at the end of July. The report claims to refute the scientific consensus around climate change. It was compiled by the DOE 2025 Climate Working Group, which was composed of five people known for their skepticism of the science underlying climate change.
The DOE report was met with significant criticism from the climate science community. A large coalition of climate scientists from all over the country came together to provide public comment refuting the DOE report. The public comment is more than four-hundred page and many contributors are climate scientists whose work was mischaracterized in the DOE report.
The National Academies of Science, Engineering, and Medicine released a report this week which also contradicts the DOE report and points out that our understanding of climate science has only improved over time and we can now say unequivocally that greenhouse gas emissions cause climate change and that “The United States faces a future in which climate-induced harm continues to worsen and today’s extremes become tomorrow’s norms.”
After pushback about the climate report, Energy Secretary Chris Wright disbanded the DOE Climate Working Group in mid-September.
Building on the DOE report, the administration has started to target other climate-related regulatory programs.
The EPA proposed recently ending the Greenhouse Gas Reporting Program. The GGRP a requires more than eight-thousand industrial facilities to report greenhouse gas emissions. The GGRP has been in effect for fifteen years and is an important part of quantifying the amount of industrial emissions of greenhouse gases in the US.
The EPA has also delayed implementation of the Section 111 Methane Rule, a rule which requires oil and gas operators to end the practice of routine flaring of natural gas and to make other improvements that would prevent the release of methane to the atmosphere. Methane is a greenhouse gas that is eight times more potent at trapping heat than carbon dioxide. The Section 111 rules are a common sense measure that ends wasteful releases of methane gas that harms the climate and contributes to poor air quality. The methane rule has support from a number of oil and gas companies and is projected to make US natural gas more competitive in a global market that is focusing more attention on the carbon intensity of oil and gas products. After pushback from a number of groups, the EPA opened a public comment period about the rule change.
All of these specific regulatory changes are happening against the backdrop of huge reductions in funding and staffing at environmental agencies like NOAA and EPA and elimination of whole departments dedicated to scientific research. These changes have already resulted in questions about whether these agencies we all depend on can continue to keep us safe from dangerous weather and pollution in the way they have for decades. Faith groups have denounced the deregulation effort as “morally depraved”, a recognition that environmental quality and climate stability are not niche partisan issues, but a fundamental part of the moral duty we all share to ensure a clean and healthy environment where everyone can thrive.