In 'Giant Gift' to Big Oil, EPA to Repeal Climate Finding That Underpins Regulations
"This is anti-scientific, immoral, and economically irresponsible," said one Democratic lawmaker.
The scientific evidence underpinning the 2009 legal opinion that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human lives and public health "has only become more robust" over the last 16 years, noted one biodiversity protection group on Wednesday—yet the top environmental agency in the United States is reportedly days away from rescinding the finding that has backed key anti-pollution regulations.
Months after Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin marked what he called "the most consequential day of deregulation in American history" by announcing plans to reconsider the 2009 "endangerment finding," administration sources said Wednesday that the EPA has drafted a plan to repeal the finding as well as limits on tailpipe emissions—which were based on the legal opinion.
The endangerment finding was made official as a result of the 2007 Supreme Court ruling in Massachusetts v. EPA, which affirmed that greenhouse gases like carbon dioxide and methane are pollutants that must be regulated under the Clean Air Act.
The finding was outlined in a 210-page document that explained how six greenhouse gases were harming public health and safety by contributing to more frequent and severe extreme heat and storms, and were expected to cause higher rates of death and disease.
The New York Times notably pointed out that "the draft EPA rule does not appear to focus on the science or try to make the case that fossil fuels aren't warming the planet" but rather claims that the agency overstepped its authority by finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger the public.
"The EPA intends to argue that imposing climate regulations on automakers poses the real harm to human health because it would lead to higher prices and reduced consumer choice, according to the two people familiar with the administration's plan," the Times reported.
Effectively, said former Human Rights Watch executive director Kenneth Roth, the EPA is proceeding as though President Donald Trump "has 'solved' climate change."
"He will revoke the scientific findings behind it and hence eliminate the ability of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to work on it," said Roth. "And we're not supposed to notice the consequences."
If the endangerment finding is repealed as planned, it would clear the way to erase all regulatory limits on pollution from vehicles, power plants, and other sources, as well as preventing future administrations from passing regulations.
"This is BEYOND devastating for future generations," said Illinois Secretary of State Alexi Giannoulias.
The Trump administration is moving to repeal the foundational scientific finding as well as tailpipe emissions limits weeks after a study by three climate experts found that the devastating floods in central Texas earlier this month—which killed at least 135 people, including dozens of young children—were caused by "very exceptional meteorological conditions" that were induced by human-caused climate change.
The proposed repeal of the endangerment finding "is anti-scientific, immoral, and economically irresponsible," said U.S. Rep. Sean Casten (D-Ill.).
The Center for Biological Diversity (CBD) pointed out that the tailpipe emissions rules Trump plans to slash would not only cut 7 billion metric tons of pollution-causing emissions but also save the average driver $6,000 in fuel and maintenance costs.
"This cynical one-two punch is intended to allow Trump's Flat Earth EPA to slam the brakes on reducing auto pollution and ignore urgent warnings from the world's leading scientists about the need for climate action," said Dan Becker, director of CBD's Climate Transport Campaign.
Advocates have condemned Trump and other top administration officials for working in the interest of fossil fuel companies by moving to roll back federal policies aimed at promoting renewable energy and cutting down on emissions. The president promised oil executives he would do so during his campaign last year when he asked them to donate $1 billion to him in a statement that sparked an investigation over the alleged quid pro quo offer.
On Tuesday, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington released a report showing that White House aides hold up to $2.25 million in Big Oil stocks.
"By revoking this key scientific finding our government is putting fealty to Big Oil over sound science and people's health," said Becker. "These proposals are a giant gift to oil companies that will do real damage to people, wildlife, and future generations."
Rescinding the vehicle emissions regulations and the endangerment finding makes "a mockery of the institutions set up to protect us all," said Anne Jellema, executive director of 350.org.
"It's one thing to willfully ignore the science in favor of profit, but to attempt to cancel it altogether beggars belief," said Jellema. "Canceling the endangerment finding would declare open season on all of humanity, and cause irreversible harm to the entire planet, not just within the boundaries of the United States."
“We are already bearing witness to the impacts of the chaotic policy changes being pushed through by this administration. These have cost us lives, and will continue to do so long into the future," she added.
Jellema urged climate advocates to make their opposition to the repeal known after it is formally announced, at which point it will be subject to public comment.
"We will not sit back," said Jellema, "and let this administration unravel the protections we have fought so long and hard for."
