.jpg)
Industrial emissions
The entirety of the legal infrastructure that classes greenhouse gas emissions as a pollutant may be undone by removing one ruling.
The Trump administration appears to be taking steps to dismantle federal regulation of greenhouse gas emissions by targeting the 2009 Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) endangerment finding.
This landmark determination, which established that greenhouse gases endanger public health and welfare, serves as the legal foundation for federal climate policies under the Clean Air Act.
Its potential repeal would have sweeping consequences for climate regulations, industry standards, and America’s role in global climate commitments.
The EPA’s 2009 endangerment finding was based on overwhelming scientific evidence linking greenhouse gas emissions to climate change and associated public health risks.
The finding enabled the EPA to regulate emissions from vehicles, power plants, and industrial sources.
It has been reaffirmed by courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, and further solidified by legislative measures like the Inflation Reduction Act, which codified greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Experts have long regarded the finding as the bedrock of U.S. climate policy.
Michael Greenstone, founding director of the University of Chicago's Institute for Climate and Sustainable Growth, has likened it to a “Jenga piece of climate policy,” suggesting that removing it could collapse an entire framework of emissions regulations.
On his first day in office, President Trump issued an executive order directing the EPA to review the endangerment finding’s legality and applicability.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin has since urged the administration to repeal it, a move cheered by some conservative groups but opposed by many in the energy sector.
Jeffrey Holmstead, a former EPA official under George W. Bush, noted that some fossil fuel companies actually prefer regulatory certainty over the chaos that repeal might bring.
Removing the endangerment finding could expose businesses to a patchwork of state regulations and lawsuits, complicating long-term investment planning.
Overturning the endangerment finding would be fraught with legal and scientific obstacles:
Surprisingly, key players in the energy sector, including some petroleum companies and utilities, have voiced concerns about repealing the endangerment finding. Without a federal framework, states could impose their own regulations, creating a fragmented and unpredictable regulatory landscape.
Meanwhile, environmental groups and climate advocates have denounced the move. Vickie Patton, general counsel at the Environmental Defense Fund, called any repeal effort “reckless, unlawful, and a direct threat to Americans suffering from climate pollution.”
Should the Trump administration succeed in overturning the endangerment finding, the consequences could be profound:
The Trump administration has not yet made a final decision on the endangerment finding, but its repeal would be one of the most aggressive attacks on climate policy in U.S. history.
Given the legal, scientific, and political hurdles, experts predict a prolonged battle if the administration moves forward with its plan.
With the stakes so high, all eyes are on how the EPA and White House will proceed—and how the courts will respond to what is sure to be a fiercely contested issue.
By Jed Thomas
IET 36.3 May
Product directory
.jpg)
.jpg)
