EPA Should Protect Human Health & the Environment -- They Aren't

By Maurice Carter, Co-Founder & President

Surprisingly, the federal website for the United States Environmental Protection Agency still says "The mission of EPA is to protect human health and the environment."  (My apologies if reading that caused you to spew coffee, a soft drink, or something stronger through your nose.  If we couldn't laugh, we would cry.)  But, after over a year of bad news, things got much worse last week for anyone not spending their days in the boardroom of a major oil company.

On February 12, President Trump and US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin announced the Trump administration was officially rescinding the 2009 "Endangerment Finding," which had given US  agencies authority for over 16 years to regulate six greenhouse gases (including CO2) as harmful pollutants that endanger American health and wellbeing.  This action removes the legal basis by which the EPA has regulated fuel efficiency and tailpipe emissions standards.  It also paves the way for repealing rules that restrict pollution from power plants and oil and gas operations.

In announcing the change, President Trump claimed "this has nothing to do with public health," adding "This was all a scam, a giant scam."  Neither of those statements could be farther from the truth.

---

Though disturbing and dangerous, this action was not unexpected.  Administrator Zeldin first announced the proposed rule change on August 1, 2025.  Which meant, by process, public comments could be submitted up until September 15, 2025.

One of the most thorough and authoritative responses was submitted by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines, which produced the consensus study report "Effects of Human-Caused Greenhouse Gas Emissions on U.S. Climate, Health, and Welfare*," authored by 16 scientists and eight study staff and then peer-reviewed by 15 other scientists.  Before I share their findings, let me give some context to the weight and meaning of their report.

What Are the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicines?

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine operate under a congressional charter signed by President Abraham Lincoln in 1863, at the height of the Civil War, to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology.  The work of the academies is carried out by a network of thousands of renowned experts, practitioners, and thought leaders who volunteer their service to solving society’s toughest challenges.

What Is a Consensus Study Report?

As explained by the Academies:  "Consensus Study Reports published by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine document the evidence-based consensus on the study’s statement of task by an authoring committee of experts. Reports typically include findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on information gathered by the committee and the committee’s deliberations. Each report has been subjected to a rigorous and independent peer-review process and it represents the position of the National Academies on the statement of task."

To respond to the rule changes proposed by Administrator Zeldin last August, the Academies assembled a team of volunteers and tasked them as follows:

"The impetus for this report was a notice of proposed rulemaking issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) indicating its intention to rescind the 2009 action titled “Endangerment and Cause or Contribute Findings for Greenhouse Gases Under Section 202(a) of the Clean Air Act.” Recognizing that significantly more evidence is available today, the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine launched this study to review newly available scientific evidence on the topics considered in the Technical Support Document that EPA prepared in considering whether to make the finding (see Box 1.2 for the Statement of Task). The committee’s report focuses on evidence gathered by the scientific community since the Technical Support Document was published in 2009 and describes supporting evidence, the level of confidence, and areas that are under continuing debate or are unknown."

The team of 16 scientists and eight study staff completed a draft report that was then peer-reviewed by 15 other experts in the field.  The final report submitted to the EPA by the September 15 deadline presented the conclusions and supporting data outlined below.  (Use areas to scroll.)

---

The full report is 112-pages-long, filled with extensive data and additional citations to support each  conclusion above.​  The summary finding delivered to the EPA was as shown below:

In summary, the committee concludes that the evidence for current and future harm to human health and welfare created by human-caused GHGs is beyond scientific dispute. Much of the understanding of climate change that was uncertain or tentative in 2009 is now resolved, and new threats have been identified.

A Dangerous Rule Change Based on Dubious "Science"

When EPA Administrator Zeldin revealed his proposed rule change last August, the announcement came on the heels of a report issued on July 23, 2025 by the US Department of Energy titled "A Critical Review of Impacts of Greenhouse Gas Emissions on the U.S. Climate."  Purported to be an objective assessment of the current science around climate change, the report was put together in secrecy by a team of five scientists, handpicked by  US Energy Secretary Chris Wright, each well-known for holding dismissive views on climate change risks and impacts.

Though it was published without peer-review or comment, the DOE report was universally condemned by the scientific community as misleading, error-filled, and lacking in scientific rigor.  Much of the criticism came from climate scientists who argued their work cited in the report was misquoted, misconstrued, or taken out of context.  Reporting from Politico Energy & Environment News shows the DOE report was even strongly criticized by scientists inside the department who called it "Misleading. Unjustified. Hypocritical."  Secretary Wright formally disbanded the working group on the eve of a lawsuit filed by multiple non-profits arguing the process to create the report violated the law by operating in secret with authors "of only one point of view."  A US District Court judge agreed and declared the report was created illegally, but did not order that it be stricken from the public record.

Climate Scientist Overwhelmingly Agree Human Activity Is Causing Climate Change

The decision by the EPA to repeal the Endangerment Finding -- and the clumsy work of the DOE used to justify the action -- both fly in the face of overwhelming scientific consensus that climate change is caused by greenhouse gases generated from human activities.  A 2021 survey of 88,125 climate-related studies by Cornell University Researchers found:  "More than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is mainly caused by humans.

Flawed DOE Report Was Preceded by Overt Actions to Silence Real Science

At the same time Energy Secretary Wright was convening his secret panel of five climate-denying scientists, the Trump administration was actively shutting down valid scientific research and reporting on climate change.  In April 2025, the President Trump dismissed the group of 400 scientists and other experts working on the Sixth National Climate Assessment scheduled to be published in 2027.  The assessment published every four years is the US Government’s preeminent report on climate change impacts, risks, and responses. It is congressionally mandated by the 1990 Global Change Research Act to provide the scientific foundation to support informed decision-making across the United States.

In June 2025, all five prior editions of the National Climate Assessment were suddenly removed without comment from federal government websites.  Thankfully, quick-thinking former employees of the government cloned the Fifth National Climate Assessment and have published in on the climate.us website, which is the non-profit successor to the climate.gov website previously run by the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).  That government site was also shut down by the Trump administration.

The climate report released by the Department of Energy in July 2025 includes a summary statement from Energy Secretary Chris Wright stating:

"Climate change is real, and it deserves attention. But it is not the greatest threat facing humanity. That distinction belongs to global energy poverty. As someone who values data, I know that improving the human condition depends on expanding access to reliable, affordable energy."

This was Wright's way of telling us: stop worrying about climate change and just "drill, baby, drill."  Not coincidentally, Wright joined the Trump administration after serving 14 years as CEO of a gas fracking company he founded.  It's his word (plus five hand-picked climate deniers) against hundreds of  climate scientists whose work was done transparently and published only after extensive peer-reviews and revisions as The Fifth National Climate Assessment in 2023.  Their work should be the basis for driving EPA rule-making.  You can read the entire report here, but below are links to some important graphics from the report:
​

• What is unprecedented about our current climate moment?
• Where are financial impacts of climate disasters being felt?
• How will flood impacts worsen if greenhouse gas emissions continue to increase?
• How will sea level rise impact US coastlines?
• What will life be like with 2°C (3.6°F) of warming?
• How much hotter could it get?
• What impacts will we experience if global warming accelerates?

---

Current climate changes are unprecedented over thousands of years

Risks from extreme events are increasing

Increased flooding will impact communities of color

Increased flooding will put more people & property at risk

Each US region will experience change in a +2°C world

Future warming will be determined by our emissions level

Higher warming brings more severe consequences

The yawning chasm between what climate science is telling us and what Secretary Wright, Administrator Zeldin, and President Trump want you to believe makes the Grand Canyon look like a backyard ditch.  On something this consequential -- a move that affects not only you, but your entire family, their quality of life, and prospects for their future -- consider this.

The extreme actions by the Trump administration to shut down, thwart, and hide real climate science and supplant it with shoddy work by the Department of Energy happened for just one reason:  to justify EPA's repeal of the Endangerment Finding.  It's a payback to big donors in the 2024 presidential campaign.  We are endangered not only by greenhouse gas emissions, but also by the very agency tasked with the mission "to protect human health and the environment."  For they have chosen to protect nothing more than the profits of big oil, gas, and coal.

The EPA's missions statement includes as a core responsibility that EPA works to ensure that "National efforts to reduce environmental risks are based on the best available scientific information."  Well, in this administration, are they?