U.S. climate expert Lisa Sachs has slammed the Trump administration's revoking of the bedrock scientific determination that enables the government to regulate climate-heating pollutions.
U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday announced the revocation of a key 2009 climate determination that has served as the legal foundation for federal climate regulations, including rules on greenhouse gas emissions from motor vehicles and mandates supporting electric vehicle adoption.
Trump and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Administrator Lee Zeldin unveiled the decision at the White House, describing it as the "single largest deregulatory action in U.S. history."
Many described the move as a gift to "billionaire polluters" at the expense of Americans' health.
"The part that's most bizarre here is the claim that this is going to 'save anyone in the U.S., money' or that this is going to 'help U.S. industries', that part is absolutely ridiculous. This is going to be tied up in litigation for a long time. So we're just at the beginning. We're nowhere near knowing what the outcomes are. But the worst thing for industries is regulatory uncertainty. This is worse for industry, it's bad for consumers. It's hard to know what the logic is here," said Lisa Sachs, director of the Columbia Center on Sustainable Investment and associate professor at Columbia Climate School.
"Most of the rest of the world, by the way, first of all, is fundamentally moving on with a climate aligned agenda. They're aligning regulation, industrial policy and market demand. We are just losing ground. And in a global world, industry can go where the rules are more stable, where the markets are more stable, where all of these are aligned. So I think the world... Well, I'm sad for the United States to be so out of step with where the world is going, but I think the rest of the world is not following the U.S. down this path," Sachs continued.
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency said it is saving American taxpayers over 1.3 trillion U.S. dollars.
"I seriously doubt they are counting the things you're absolutely right to be counting, which are not only the extraordinarily expensive cost of climate change, but also fuel savings for consumers, public health benefits from reduced co-pollutants, and then the economic cost of regulatory uncertainty -- because that carries an economic cost too for the industries -- the cost of capital and other innovation and other costs. So there are a lot of costs that are not at all counted in the White House's ridiculous estimate," said Sachs.
The determination, known as the 2009 Greenhouse Gas Endangerment Finding, concluded that carbon dioxide, methane and four other greenhouse gases threaten public health and welfare. It has been used to justify regulations such as vehicle emissions standards and requirements for fossil fuel companies to report their emissions.
Former U.S. President Barack Obama said on X that the endangerment finding has served as the basis for limits on tailpipe emissions and power plant rules. "Without it, 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."
Climate expert slams White House repeal of key finding underpinning climate regulations
