According to reports released this week, the Trump administration is considering scrapping a hallmark finding that greenhouse gases endanger public health—and even some oil companies are opposed to the idea.
Based on reports from both Bloomberg and The Washington Post, Lee Zeldin, the recently appointed administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, has privately urged President Donald Trump to rewrite what’s known as the “Endangerment Finding,” a federal statement released in 2009 that set the stage for the EPA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. Here’s what to know about the finding, and what could happen if Trump rescinds it.
What is the “Endangerment Finding”?
The 2009 Endangerment Finding was the federal government’s official acknowledgment that greenhouse gases are a threat to public health. The statement specifically identifies six problematic gases: carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide, hydrofluorocarbons, perfluorocarbons, and sulfur hexafluoride.
“The Administrator finds that six greenhouse gases taken in combination endanger both the public health and the public welfare of current and future generations,” the statement reads. “The Administrator also finds that the combined emissions of these greenhouse gases from new motor vehicles and new motor vehicle engines contribute to the greenhouse gas air pollution that endangers public health and welfare.”
Today, the Endangerment Finding is the key legal mechanism underpinning the regulation of air pollutants from vehicles and power plants. Scrapping the finding was first suggested in the right-wing Project 2025, which also advised eliminating federal restrictions on fossil fuel drilling on public lands and curtailing federal investments in renewable energy technologies. The move was also considered during Trump’s first term, though it never came to fruition.
What will happen if the Endangerment Finding is scrapped?
Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act, the EPA can regulate air pollutants if it finds that they “cause, or contribute to, air pollution which may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.” If the Endangerment Finding were to be revoked, that could set the scene for a major federal deregulation of greenhouse gas emissions, especially when it comes to the automotive industry and power plants.
The possibility comes as several other levers of climate deregulation are on the horizon. This week, Congress is set to vote on two bills that would roll back climate regulations instituted in the final months of the Biden administration. The first bill concerns a fee on methane emissions by oil and gas companies, which the EPA said in November would reduce methane emissions by 1.2 million metric tons through 2035. The second bill concerns efficiency standards for tankless water heaters set by the Energy Department, which were predicted to reduce carbon dioxide emissions by 32 million metric tons over 30 years.
Meanwhile, operations at the EPA might also have a major shake-up in store. During his first Cabinet meeting on Wednesday, Trump said Zeldin is currently planning to cut “65—or so—% of the people from environmental.” A White House official later clarified that Zeldin plans to eliminate 65% of what it says is the EPA’s “wasteful spending,” which will include staff cuts.
How are experts reacting to this news?
So far, several legal experts have suggested that an attempt to roll back the Endangerment Finding would result in an influx of legal challenges, and that it wouldn’t hold up under scrutiny.
Sean Donahue is an attorney who has represented environmental groups that support the Endangerment Finding. In an interview with The Washington Post, he argued, “You can have a lot of good and reasonable disputes about exactly how we should be addressing climate change. But the proposition that greenhouse gas emissions from human activities don’t endanger public health and welfare is not a position that could be supported by the science or what EPA’s own record suggests.”
David Doniger, a senior strategist and attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council, told The Washington Post that his firm is prepared to challenge the move in court, should it come to that.
Even some oil and gas companies are wary of the potential decision. According to Bloomberg, some energy companies have pointed out that nullifying the Endangerment Finding would open the doors for an influx of public nuisance lawsuits against oil producers and power plants.
At the time of this writing, Trump has not commented on whether he plans to act on Zeldin’s recommendation.
No comments