logo
EPA's new AI tool disagrees with Zeldin on climate change

EPA's new AI tool disagrees with Zeldin on climate change

E&E News2 days ago

EPA has a new generative artificial intelligence tool. And it believes climate change is dangerous.
That puts it at odds with the Trump administration, which aims to sideline climate change research and data to make it easier to repeal regulations.
Closer to home, the AI tool threatens to provide answers that contradict the agency's leader, Administrator Lee Zeldin, who is preparing to release a draft finding in the near future that contends greenhouse gases pose no risk to the public, as he tries to revoke the endangerment finding, a 2009 scientific declaration that underpins most EPA climate regulations.
Advertisement
The agency's Office of Mission Support released the internal tool for staff May 22, saying in a memo obtained by POLITICO's E&E News that it was intended to help 'modernize the agency and gain new efficiencies.'
The office also set some rules for use, including telling staff not to 'use the tool as the sole performer of an inherently government function or as the decisionmaker in any EPA activities,' and to check its answers for 'accuracy and bias.'
'Recognize that output from the tool may be convincing, but it may be wrong,' said OMS, the agency's administrative office.
The Trump administration has used AI heavily. But experts said that despite its rollout last month, the EPA tool was probably not developed under President Donald Trump.
Ann Dunkin, who served as chief information officer at the Department of Energy under former President Joe Biden, said because the tool was designed for internal use and utilizes EPA data, it is probably an artifact of the Biden era.
'What the departments and agencies are trying to do is experiment with AI and figure out how it can help and how it can make people more productive. And that's what's going on here,' she said.
The Biden administration maintained inventories of AI tools, which showed 17 models in use at EPA last year.
The memo introducing the tool last month stated that it has 'been in the works for some time.'
EPA didn't respond to requests for comment.
But the tool itself answered questions submitted by three agency employees, who were granted anonymity to avoid retribution.
It explained its own origin by stating that it was 'developed by OpenAI, and it is integrated into Microsoft products and services, such as Azure OpenAI Service.'
Beth Simone Noveck, a professor of experiential AI at Northeastern University, said that seemed to indicate EPA had a contract with Microsoft for an AI language model that had been customized for use in agency work.
The tool's views on climate science are conventional — if not always accurate. For example, one EPA staffer shared an exchange in which the tool appeared to say the power sector is the largest source of U.S. climate pollution. In fact, it's second to transportation.
EPA is expected to soon argue as part of a regulatory rollback that U.S. power plants contribute too little carbon emissions to planetary warming to warrant regulation.
The AI tool is clear that heat-trapping pollution poses a threat to public health and welfare — a key aspect of a foundational EPA scientific conclusion, known as the endangerment finding — that underpins most climate regulations. Zeldin is expected to try to undo the finding soon.
The AI tool listed 'extreme weather events,' vector-borne diseases, and food and water shortages among the threats posed by human-caused warming, in search results shared with POLITICO'S E&E News.
'Climate change is real and is supported by a vast body of scientific evidence,' it states in one answer. 'It refers to significant and lasting changes in the Earth's climate, particularly an increase in global temperatures, largely due to human activities such as burning fossil fuels, deforestation and industrial processes.'
Trump has rejected the basic tenets of climate change and is pursuing an energy agenda that promotes unfettered production of oil, gas and coal.
His administration has also doubled down on the use of AI as a governance tool. Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy, who co-ran the so-called Department of Government Efficiency until both left the cost-cutting initiative, wrote in a November op-ed in The Wall Street Journal that they planned to use 'advanced technology' to identify and kill rules that weren't in line with recent Supreme Court decisions.
AI was also used in writing a recent Department of Health and Human Services report on U.S. life expectancy and is blamed for the report citing studies that don't exist.
Other agencies are launching new AI tools right now. Noveck of Northeastern University said the U.S. Food and Drug Administration got one around the same time as EPA.
She said AI tools are good at weeding out jargon and translating regulatory text into plain language to make it more accessible and usable by people and businesses. But, she said, they are not a substitute for human judgment in policymaking.
'You cannot use these tools to replace humans,' Noveck said. 'You need them to act as auxiliaries, as helpers, as assistants — effectively as a next generation of word processor.'
The HHS report had evidently not been reviewed for accuracy, she said.
'It's irresponsible, it's unprofessional, and it's shoddy,' she added. 'And when it comes to policies that affect the lives of millions of people, it's immoral and unconscionable.'
Dunkin, the former DOE official, said the OMS rules for use also seemed to indicate that it was a Biden-era tool, despite making its debut under Trump.
'It doesn't sound like a DOGE project, because those folks don't believe in checking their work,' said Dunkin, who was EPA's chief information officer during former President Barack Obama's second term.
DOGE took over the existing U.S. Digital Service, a decade-old White House office, and from there gained access to agencies and their data. Some of that data appears to have been transferred outside of the federal government, Dunkin said.
She added that during the Biden administration, EPA developed AI tools to help speed environmental reviews by gathering documents and permitting requirements from across the government.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel
Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel

CBS News

time36 minutes ago

  • CBS News

Supreme Court halts lower court orders requiring DOGE to hand over information about work and personnel

Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Elon Musk on DOGE and his work in and out of government Washington — The Supreme Court on Friday halted lower court orders that required the White House's Department of Government Efficiency to turn over information to a government watchdog group as part of a lawsuit that tests whether President Trump's cost-cutting task force has to comply with federal public records law. The order from the high court clears DOGE for now from having to turn over records related to its work and personnel, and keeps Amy Gleason, identified as its acting administrator, from having to answer questions at a deposition. Justices Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan and Ketanji Brown Jackson dissented. "The portions of the district court's April 15 discovery order that require the government to disclose the content of intra–executive branch USDS recommendations and whether those recommendations were followed are not appropriately tailored," the court said in its order. "Any inquiry into whether an entity is an agency for the purposes of the Freedom of Information Act cannot turn on the entity's ability to persuade. Furthermore, separation of powers concerns counsel judicial deference and restraint in the context of discovery regarding internal executive branch communications." The Supreme Court sent the case back to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit for more proceedings. Chief Justice John Roberts temporarily paused the district court's order last month, which allowed the Supreme Court more time to consider the Trump administration's bid for emergency relief. A district judge had ordered DOGE to turn over documents to the group, Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, by June 3, and for Gleason's deposition to be completed by June 13. The underlying issue in the case involves whether DOGE is subject to the Freedom of Information Act. CREW argues that the cost-cutting task force wields "substantial independent authority," which makes it a de facto agency that must comply with federal public records law. The Justice Department, however, disagrees and instead claims that DOGE is a presidential advisory body housed within the Executive Office of the President that makes recommendations to the president and federal agencies on matters that are important to Mr. Trump's second-term agenda. DOGE's agency status was not before the Supreme Court, though the high court may be asked to settle that matter in the future. Instead, the Trump administration had asked the justices to temporarily halt a district court's order that allowed CREW to gather certain information from DOGE as part of its effort to determine whether the task force is an advisory panel that is outside FOIA's scope or is an agency that is subject to the records law. The judge overseeing the dispute, U.S. District Judge Christopher Cooper, had ordered DOGE to turn over certain documents to the watchdog group by June 3 and to complete all depositions, including of Gleason, by June 13. Mr. Trump ordered the creation of DOGE on his first day back in the White House as part of his initiative to slash the size of the federal government. Since then, DOGE team members have fanned out to agencies across the executive branch and have been part of efforts to shrink the federal workforce and shutter entities like the U.S. Agency for International Development and the U.S. Institute of Peace. DOGE has also attempted to gain access to sensitive databases kept by the Internal Revenue Service, Social Security Administration and Office of Personnel Management, prompting legal battles. In an effort to learn more about DOGE's structure and operations, CREW submitted an expedited FOIA request to the task force. After it did not respond in a timely manner, CREW filed a lawsuit and sought a preliminary injunction to expedite processing of its records request. The organization argued that DOGE was exercising significant independent authority, which made it an agency subject to FOIA. Cooper granted CREW's request for a preliminary injunction in March and agreed that FOIA likely applies to DOGE because it is "likely exercising substantial independent authority much greater than other [Executive Office of the President] components held to be covered by FOIA." He then allowed CREW to conduct limited information-gathering, which the watchdog group said aimed to determine whether DOGE is exercising substantial authority that would bring it within FOIA's reach. A federal appeals court ultimately declined to pause that order, requiring DOGE to turn over the documents sought by CREW. In seeking the Supreme Court's intervention, Solicitor General D. John Sauer said CREW is conducting a "fishing expedition" into DOGE's activities. He warned that if Cooper's order remains in place, several components of the White House, such as the offices of the chief of staff and national security adviser, would be subject to FOIA. "That untenable result would compromise the provision of candid, confidential advice to the president and disrupt the inner workings of the Executive Branch," Sauer wrote. "Yet, in the decisions below, the court of appeals and district court treated a presidential advisory body as a potential 'agency' based on the persuasive force of its recommendations — threatening opening season for FOIA requests on the president's advisors." But lawyers for CREW told the Supreme Court in a filing that the Justice Department's position "would require courts to blindly yield to the Executive's characterization" of the authority and operations of a component of the Executive Office of the President. They said adopting the Trump administration's approach to DOGE would give the president "free reign" to create new entities within the Executive Office of the President that exercise substantial independent authority but are shielded from transparency laws. "Courts would be forced to blindly accept the government's representations about an EOP unit's realworld operations, unable to test those representations through even limited discovery," CREW's lawyers wrote. "It is that extreme position, not the discovery order, that would 'turn[] FOIA on its head.'"

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store