The United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has announced plans to revoke a scientific finding on climate change that has served as the basis for key environmental and pollution regulations. Lee Zeldin, President Donald Trump‘s pick to head the EPA, stated that the agency would nix the 2009 “endangerment finding” that links emissions from motor vehicles to climate change and negative health impacts.
Zeldin argued that those who seek to reduce carbon emissions only highlight the negative effects, saying, “With regard to the endangerment finding, they’ll say carbon dioxide is a pollutant and that’s the end of it. They’ll never acknowledge any type of benefit or need for carbon dioxide.” He emphasized the importance of carbon dioxide for the planet, stating, “It’s important to note, and they don’t, how important it is for the planet.”
The “endangerment finding” has been central to justifying regulations on greenhouse gas emissions, including vehicle emissions standards. Issued under Democratic President Barack Obama, it has become a frequent target of conservative lawmakers and fossil fuel companies seeking its repeal. Despite withstanding several legal challenges in court, its revocation would continue the Trump administration’s push to roll back environmental protections and slash regulations in the name of boosting the economy.
Zeldin positioned the repeal of the “endangerment finding” as a boon to business, stating, “There are people who, in the name of climate change, are willing to bankrupt the country.” He claimed that the finding’s revocation would be the “largest deregulatory action” in US history and a potentially fatal blow to efforts to curb climate change. “This has been referred to as basically driving a dagger into the heart of the climate change religion,” Zeldin said.
The revocation would likely face significant hurdles, including procedural challenges under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). The APA requires that agencies use notice-and-comment procedures to repeal rules issued using the same procedures. Given the extensive notice-and-comment rulemaking proceeding that led to the original finding, repealing it would require a similar process, which can be lengthy and prone to legal challenges.
A 2021 study from Harvard University’s TH Chan School of Public Health found that decreased vehicle emissions helped reduce yearly deaths attributed to air pollution from 27,700 in 2008 to 19,800 in 2017. Researchers credited this decline to a combination of federal regulations and technological improvements. Supporters consider air pollution regulations vital to slowing climate change and minimizing adverse health effects.
However, Trump has defied scientific consensus on climate change, referring to it as a “hoax.” His energy secretary, Chris Wright, argued that climate change is “not an existential crisis” but a “byproduct of progress,” stating, “I am willing to take the modest negative trade-off for this legacy of human advancement.” The United Nations estimates that climate change will contribute to 250,000 additional deaths per year between 2030 and 2050 due to issues like tropical diseases, heat stress, and food security.
The International Court of Justice has also weighed in on the issue, stating that climate change is an “urgent and existential threat” in its first-ever climate opinion, requested by the UN. This sentiment is echoed by many experts and organizations working to address the climate crisis.