WASHINGTON – The Trump administration on Feb. 12 announced the repeal of a scientific finding that greenhouse gas emissions endanger human health and the elimination of federal tailpipe emissions standards for cars and trucks.
Trump Administration Rolls Back Climate Change Regulations
The move represents the most sweeping climate change policy rollback by the administration to date, following a series of regulatory cuts aimed at bolstering fossil fuel development and hindering the expansion of clean energy.
“Under the process just completed by the EPA (Environmental Protection Agency), we are officially terminating the so-called endangerment finding, a disastrous Obama-era policy that severely damaged the American auto industry and drove up prices for American consumers,” President Donald Trump said, adding that it was the biggest deregulatory action in the country’s history.
The EPA stated in a press release that the endangerment finding was based on an incorrect interpretation of federal clean air laws, which were intended to protect Americans from pollutants causing local or regional harm, not global climate change.
“This flawed legal theory took the agency outside the scope of its statutory authority in multiple respects,” the EPA said.
Trump announced the repeal alongside EPA administrator Lee Zeldin and White House budget director Russell Vought, who was a key architect of the conservative policy blueprint, Project 2025.
Trump has previously described climate change as a “con job” and withdrew the US from the Paris Agreement, removing the world’s largest historic contributor to global warming from international efforts to combat it. He also eliminated Biden-era tax credits designed to accelerate the adoption of electric cars and renewable energy.
Former President Barack Obama criticized the move on social media platform X, stating that without the endangerment finding, “we’ll be less safe, less healthy and less able to fight climate change – all so the fossil fuel industry can make even more money”.
Zeldin said the Trump administration had addressed the most significant climate policy of the last 15 years, a matter avoided during Trump’s first term due to industry concerns about legal and regulatory uncertainty.
“Referred to by some as the holy grail of federal regulatory overreach, the 2009 Obama EPA endangerment finding is now eliminated,” he said.
The endangerment finding, initially adopted in 2009, prompted the EPA to take action under the Clean Air Act of 1963 to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide, methane, and four other heat-trapping pollutants from vehicles, power plants, and other industries.
The action followed a 2007 Supreme Court ruling in the Massachusetts versus EPA case, which affirmed the agency’s authority to regulate carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act.
The repeal removes the requirements to measure, report, certify, and comply with federal greenhouse gas emission standards for cars, but may not immediately affect stationary sources like power plants.
The transportation and power sectors each contribute approximately a quarter of US greenhouse gas emissions, according to EPA data.
The EPA estimates the repeal and end of vehicle emission standards will save US taxpayers US$1.3 trillion (S$1.64 trillion), while the previous administration argued the rules would have provided net benefits to consumers through lower fuel costs and other savings.
The Alliance for Automotive Innovation, representing major automakers, did not endorse the action but noted that automotive emissions regulations finalized in the previous administration are “extremely challenging for automakers to achieve given the current marketplace demand for EVs (electric vehicles)”.
The Environmental Defense Fund (EDF) argued that the repeal will ultimately cost Americans more, despite the EPA’s claim that climate regulations increase costs for consumers.
“Administrator Lee Zeldin has directed EPA to stop protecting the American people from the pollution that’s causing worse storms, floods and skyrocketing insurance costs,” EDF president Fred Krupp said. “This action will lead only to more of this pollution, and that will lead to higher costs and real harms for American families.”
Under the Biden administration, the EPA aimed to cut passenger vehicle fleetwide tailpipe emissions by nearly 50 percent by 2032, compared to projected 2027 levels, and anticipated that 35 to 56 percent of new vehicles sold from 2030 to 2032 would be electric.
The agency then estimated the rules would result in net benefits of US$99 billion annually through 2055, including US$46 billion in reduced fuel costs and US$16 billion in reduced maintenance and repair costs for drivers.
Consumers were projected to save an average of US$6,000 over the lifetime of new vehicles from reduced fuel and maintenance costs.
The coal industry welcomed the announcement, stating it could help prevent the retirement of aging coal-fired power plants.
America’s Power president and chief executive Michelle Bloodworth said: “Utilities have announced plans to retire more than 55,000 MW of coal-fired generation over the next five years. Reversing these retirement decisions could help offset the need to build new, more expensive electricity sources and prevent the loss of reliability attributes, such as fuel security, that the coal fleet provides.”
While many industry groups support the repeal of stringent vehicle emission standards, some have been hesitant to publicly support rescinding the endangerment finding due to potential legal and regulatory repercussions.
Legal experts suggest the policy reversal could lead to an increase in “public nuisance” lawsuits, a pathway previously blocked by a 2011 Supreme Court ruling that placed greenhouse gas regulation under the EPA’s purview rather than the courts.
“This may be another classic case where overreach by the Trump administration comes back to bite it,” said University of Maryland environmental law professor Robert Percival.
Environmental groups have condemned the proposed repeal as a threat to the climate. Reinstating the endangerment finding would likely be necessary for future administrations seeking to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, a task that could be both politically and legally complex.
Several environmental groups, including the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and Earthjustice, have stated they will challenge the reversal in court, potentially initiating a years-long legal battle that could reach the Supreme Court.
“There’ll be a lawsuit brought almost immediately, and we’ll see them in court. And we will win,” said David Doniger, senior attorney at the NRDC.
Discover more from Archyworldys
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
