Fewer greenhouse gas emissions restrictions
US President Donald Trump has announced the reversal of the so-called endangerment finding, a pivotal scientific ruling from the Obama administration that served as the foundation for much of the United States' environmental legislation.
This decision by the US Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is anticipated to have various environmental and economic consequences, with environmental groups expected to challenge the move in court.
The most direct effect of this legislative change is the reduction of restrictions on industries that produce greenhouse gases, notably vehicle manufacturers.
The 2009 endangerment finding was based on a comprehensive EPA report that identified six greenhouse gases—including carbon monoxide and methane—as threats to current and future generations.
This report followed a 2007 US Supreme Court ruling that assigned the EPA responsibility for regulating greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act, affirming that these gases unequivocally qualify as air pollutants.
Greenhouse gases contribute to atmospheric heat retention, leading to increased global temperatures.
The impact of the endangerment finding has been significant: greenhouse gas emissions in the US peaked in the late 2000s and have steadily declined since.
With the reversal of the endangerment finding, much of the legal framework limiting US industries' greenhouse gas emissions will be removed.
The Environmental Defense Fund, a non-profit organization, estimates that this change could result in an additional 7.5 to 18 billion tonnes of greenhouse gases emitted by 2055—approximately three times the current annual emissions.
The group warns that the economic cost of this increase could potentially reach into the trillions of dollars.
Cheaper cars in the US (but they'll be harder to export)
Despite opposition from environmental advocates, the Trump administration argues that rescinding the endangerment finding will yield economic benefits, especially by lowering vehicle costs.
The White House claims that reversing the finding will reduce automobile manufacturers' expenses by approximately $2,400 (£1,760) per vehicle.
Since 2009, the endangerment finding has enabled government policies that improved fuel efficiency and increased electric vehicle adoption. Notably, former President Joe Biden's Inflation Reduction Act incentivized electric vehicle ownership and renewable energy projects.
Since Trump's return to the White House, several of these policies have been rescinded.
The recent policy change has been welcomed by some in the automotive industry.
Ford told CNBC that the move would help address "the imbalance between current emissions standards and customer choice," while the Alliance for Automotive Innovation stated it would help "correct some of the unachievable emissions regulations enacted under the previous administration."
However, with climate targets still enforced in many international markets, questions remain about how much manufacturers will alter production.
Michael Gerrard, a climate law expert at Columbia University, commented,
"This rollback is sort of cementing things that have already been done, such as the relaxation of the fuel economy standards. But it really does put the US automakers in a bind, because nobody else is going to want to buy American cars."
Nuisance lawsuits
The 2011 US Supreme Court ruling, which followed the endangerment finding, granted the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, removing this responsibility from the courts.
With the endangerment finding reversed, legal experts anticipate this authority may be undermined, potentially leading to an increase in "public nuisance" lawsuits.
Public nuisance refers to actions that interfere with the public's rights, often relating to health and safety concerns in environmental cases.
Before the 2011 ruling, several US states filed lawsuits against corporate polluters seeking compensation for pollution-related damages.
Consequently, US companies might again face such legal challenges.
Robert Percival, an environmental law professor at the University of Maryland, stated,
"This may be another classic case where overreach by the Trump administration comes back to bite it."
Public health
When announcing the end of the endangerment finding, the EPA asserted that maintaining greenhouse gas emissions standards was not essential to fulfilling its "core mission of protecting human health and the environment."
However, scientific consensus maintains that pollutants, including greenhouse gases, contribute to health problems and premature mortality.
The Environmental Defense Fund estimates that by 2055, the increased emissions could cause between 15,400 and 58,000 premature deaths.
Additionally, the organization projects tens of millions more asthma attacks and tens of thousands more hospital visits over the same period.
Falling behind in the global renewables race
While the White House highlights potential cost savings from removing greenhouse gas restrictions in the automotive sector, the announcement raises concerns about the US's position in the global renewable energy competition.
The Biden administration had promoted policies incentivizing domestic renewable technology development to maintain US competitiveness.
Margo T Oge, former EPA head during the introduction of the endangerment finding, remarked,
"While the US retreats from clean vehicle standards, the rest of the world is accelerating, and American automakers are falling behind."
She noted a significant increase in market share for electric vehicles produced by European Union and Chinese companies in recent years.
Oge wrote in Forbes,
"If the US abandons its standards, we aren't 'saving' the American auto industry; we are leaving it on an island of obsolete technology."
Former US Secretary of State John Kerry also emphasized this point, stating,
"China is now producing more wind, more solar than all of the rest of the world put together. That's what they're doing, they're deploying it. Do you think they've taken a stupid pill or something yesterday and decided to change their entire economy to meet this new standard? No, their population wants clean air."
Less industry regulation
Despite concerns about losing ground in renewable energy innovation, the Trump administration cites economic burdens imposed by regulations.
EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin described the policy change as "the single largest deregulatory action in US history" and claimed it would save American taxpayers over $1.3 trillion (£950bn).
Diana Furchtgott-Roth, who served in the US Department of Transportation during Trump's first term, told the BBC that emissions regulations had increased costs and driven manufacturing overseas.
She explained,
"It's gone to China, where it's made in a dirtier way. So to say that we're reducing global emissions by ending energy intensive manufacturing in some countries, then having it go to China and India, where it's made in a dirtier way, does not reduce global emissions."
However, John Kerry, who also served as US special envoy for climate, warned that eliminating the endangerment rule would cause significant harm worldwide, as climate change intensifies extreme weather events.
Kerry stated,
"It's very clear the administration is trading facts and trading science for denial and the wilful negligence that will cost lives and health and countless taxpayers dollars."
