
America's trillion dollar deregulation could be a dagger in the heart of net zero
This is massive. The endangerment finding underpins regulations on cars and the power sector. If it were overturned, Donald Trump could reverse costly environmental regulations put in place without explicit Congressional approval over the past decade and a half, reducing the costs of electricity and transportation.
The history of the endangerment finding dates from 2007, during the presidency of George W Bush. The Supreme Court interpreted the Clean Air Act to give the EPA the authority to regulate greenhouse gases (such as carbon dioxide and methane) if the agency decided that these gases from particular sources caused pollution and endangered the public.
Fast forward to 2009, when Barack Obama's EPA concluded that six greenhouse gases endangered public health, allowing the agency to regulate emissions of these gases under the Clean Air Act. This 'endangerment finding' triggered an onslaught of EPA climate regulations that spread to Europe and sparked the international net zero movement. This raised manufacturing costs in the West and encouraged offshoring to Asia, without necessarily reducing global emissions.
The endangerment finding used data from the 2007 Fourth Assessment Report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. In the intervening 18 years, more data have become available, and the EPA is seeking to reconsider whether greenhouse gases are having the consequences predicted in 2009. The IPCC has written a Sixth Assessment Report, published in 2022, with updated conclusions.
In addition, new Supreme Court decisions have limited the discretion granted to cabinet agencies. Executive branch agencies must hew to the letter of the law, rather than being free to interpret laws as they see fit. Anything else would be to usurp the authority of Congress, which has never explicitly authorised the EPA to regulate CO2 emissions.
If the EPA finds that greenhouse gases are not pollutants, some regulations in America would be eliminated, with potential savings of trillions of dollars. The average new car costs almost $50,000, up from $23,000 in 2009, partly due to environmental regulations.
Administrator Zeldin said: 'We will follow the science, the law, and common sense wherever it leads, and we will do so while advancing our commitment towards helping to deliver cleaner, healthier, and safer air, land, and water.'
The administration is presenting a united front on reconsidering the endangerment finding. The secretaries of the Departments of Energy, Transportation, and Interior, and the directors of the powerful Office of Management and Budget and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs within the White House, all issued supportive statements.
Transportation secretary Duffy declared: 'This will allow the DOT to accelerate its work on new vehicle fuel economy standards that will lower car prices and no longer force Americans to purchase electric vehicles they don't want.'
Some of the regulations buttressed by the endangerment finding include Obama's Clean Power Plan, which would have forced power plants out of business and was overturned by the Supreme Court in West Virginia vs. EPA; auto emissions regulations that have gradually ratcheted up and could have required around 70 per cent of new cars sold in 2032 to be battery-powered or plug-in electric; and methane controls on farms. Yet predictions that the EPA considered accurate in 2009 have since been updated.
The endangerment finding has been used as a political tool to advance control over the US economy, giving regulators the power to determine which industries could be eliminated and which could flourish. It enables subsidies for particular industries and redistribution of resources. Such regulations have become entrenched worldwide, with the consequence that net zero policies are deindustrialising Europe and preventing countries in Latin America and Africa from accessing their fossil fuel resources.
The US environmental regulatory system is premised on a 2007 analysis of climate science from the start of Obama's term. But as Obama's former undersecretary for research at the Department of Energy, Steve Koonin, wrote in his book Unsettled, the science should not prematurely be declared settled.
Above all, regulators should not be given the power to fundamentally reshape American life without democratic approval. The EPA should be congratulated. Manhattan, cows, and farmers can breathe easier again.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
18 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Love? Actually, no: Emma Thompson reveals Donald Trump asked her on a date
Emma Thompson has accepted Academy Awards, Baftas and even a damehood over a glittering career, but there was one offer she had to turn down. The actor says she once got asked out on a date by Donald Trump on the same day her divorced was confirmed. Thompson said she was in her trailer filming Primary Colors in 1998, a political satire based on Bill Clinton's presidential rise, when the phone rang. 'It was Donald Trump,' Thompson told an audience at the Locarno film festival in Switzerland, where she received the Leopard Club award for career achievement. 'He said: 'Hello, this is Donald Trump.' I thought it was a joke and asked: 'How can I help you?' Maybe he needed directions from someone. 'Then he said: 'I'd love you to come and stay at one of my beautiful places. Maybe we could have dinner.' I said: 'Well, that's very sweet. Thank you so much. I'll get back to you.'' At the time, Trump had just split from his second wife, Marla Maples. Thompson, meanwhile, had just finalised her divorce from Kenneth Branagh. Only later did she twig the timing. 'I realised my divorce decree had come through that day,' she said on Saturday. 'I bet he's got people looking for a nice divorcee to take out on his arm. 'And he found the number in my trailer,' she joked. 'I mean, that's stalking.' Thompson, a lifelong Labour supporter who publicly backed Jeremy Corbyn's 2017 and 2019 election campaigns, is a high-profile environmental activist who has campaigned for refugee and women's rights. She told the audience she could have altered geopolitics if she'd accepted Trump's offer. 'I could have gone on a date with Donald Trump, and then I would have a story to tell,' she said. 'I could have changed the course of American history.' The talk at the festival also covered Thompson's film career and one of her most famous roles in Richard Curtis' Christmas romcom, Love Actually. In the 2003 classic, Thompson plays Karen, whose marriage to Harry, played by Alan Rickman, comes under strain when Harry becomes tempted into an affair with his secretary. Reflecting on the film's everlasting popularity, she said: 'I mean, it's honestly a constant source of astonishment to me that that film lasted – not that I don't like the film. I like it very much, but it's weird.' Discussing the movie and the moment Karen discovers her partner has been unfaithful, she said she believes its appeal 'touched a nerve because [when] we get a heartbreak, especially women, we have to hide it because we don't want people to see it'.


The Guardian
18 minutes ago
- The Guardian
Love? Actually, no: Emma Thompson reveals Donald Trump asked her on a date
Emma Thompson has accepted Academy Awards, Baftas and even a damehood over a glittering career, but there was one offer she had to turn down. The actor says she once got asked out on a date by Donald Trump on the same day her divorced was confirmed. Thompson said she was in her trailer filming Primary Colors in 1998, a political satire based on Bill Clinton's presidential rise, when the phone rang. 'It was Donald Trump,' Thompson told an audience at the Locarno film festival in Switzerland, where she received the Leopard Club award for career achievement. 'He said: 'Hello, this is Donald Trump.' I thought it was a joke and asked: 'How can I help you?' Maybe he needed directions from someone. 'Then he said: 'I'd love you to come and stay at one of my beautiful places. Maybe we could have dinner.' I said: 'Well, that's very sweet. Thank you so much. I'll get back to you.'' At the time, Trump had just split from his second wife, Marla Maples. Thompson, meanwhile, had just finalised her divorce from Kenneth Branagh. Only later did she twig the timing. 'I realised my divorce decree had come through that day,' she said on Saturday. 'I bet he's got people looking for a nice divorcee to take out on his arm. 'And he found the number in my trailer,' she joked. 'I mean, that's stalking.' Thompson, a lifelong Labour supporter who publicly backed Jeremy Corbyn's 2017 and 2019 election campaigns, is a high-profile environmental activist who has campaigned for refugee and women's rights. She told the audience she could have altered geopolitics if she'd accepted Trump's offer. 'I could have gone on a date with Donald Trump, and then I would have a story to tell,' she said. 'I could have changed the course of American history.' The talk at the festival also covered Thompson's film career and one of her most famous roles in Richard Curtis' Christmas romcom, Love Actually. In the 2003 classic, Thompson plays Karen, whose marriage to Harry, played by Alan Rickman, comes under strain when Harry becomes tempted into an affair with his secretary. Reflecting on the film's everlasting popularity, she said: 'I mean, it's honestly a constant source of astonishment to me that that film lasted – not that I don't like the film. I like it very much, but it's weird.' Discussing the movie and the moment Karen discovers her partner has been unfaithful, she said she believes its appeal 'touched a nerve because we get a heartbreak, especially women, we have to hide it because we don't want people to see it'.


Reuters
18 minutes ago
- Reuters
Zelenskiy thanks Europe for its support as Kyiv seeks place at table with Trump and Putin
Aug 10 (Reuters) - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskiy thanked European leaders on Sunday for backing his demand for a seat at the table as Russia and the United States prepare for a summit this week where Kyiv fears they could seek to dictate terms to it for ending the 3-1/2-year war. U.S. President Donald Trump, who for weeks had been threatening new sanctions against Russia for failing to halt the conflict, announced instead last Friday that he would hold an August 15 summit with Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska. A White House official said on Saturday that Trump was open to Zelenskiy attending, but that preparations currently were for a bilateral meeting with Putin. The Kremlin leader last week ruled out meeting Zelenskiy at this point, saying the conditions for such an encounter were "unfortunately still far" from being met. Trump said a potential deal would involve "some swapping of territories to the betterment of both (sides)", a statement that compounded Ukrainian alarm that it may face pressure to surrender more land. Zelenskiy says any decisions taken without Ukraine will be "stillborn" and unworkable. On Saturday the leaders of Britain, France, Germany, Italy, Poland, Finland and the European Commission said in a joint statement that any diplomatic solution must protect the vital security interests of Ukraine and Europe. "The path to peace cannot be decided without Ukraine," they said, demanding "robust and credible security guarantees" to allow Ukraine to defend its sovereignty and territorial integrity. Zelenskiy said on Sunday: "The end of the war must be fair, and I am grateful to everyone who stands with Ukraine and our people today for the sake of peace in Ukraine, which is defending the vital security interests of our European nations." A European official said Europe had come up with a counter-proposal to Trump's, but declined to provide details. Russian officials accused Europe of trying to thwart Trump's efforts to end the war. "The Euro-imbeciles are trying to prevent American efforts to help resolve the Ukrainian conflict," former Russian president Dmitry Medvedev posted on social media on Sunday. Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria Zakharova said in a vituperative statement that the relationship between Ukraine and the European Union resembled "necrophilia". Roman Alekhin, a Russian war blogger, said Europe had been reduced to the role of a spectator. "If Putin and Trump reach an agreement directly, Europe will be faced with a fait accompli. Kyiv - even more so," he said. No details of the proposed territorial swap that Trump alluded to have been officially announced. Russia, which mounted a full-scale invasion of Ukraine in February 2022, holds about a fifth of the country and has claimed the regions of Luhansk, Donetsk, Kherson and Zaporizhzhia as its own, although it controls only about 70% of the last three. Russia has also taken pockets of territory in the Sumy and Kharkiv regions and said in recent weeks it has captured villages in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Ukraine says it holds a sliver of the Kursk region in western Russia. Sergei Markov, a pro-Kremlin analyst, said a swap could entail Russia handing over 1,500 sq km to Ukraine and obtaining 7,000 sq km, which he said Russia would capture anyway within about six months. He provided no evidence to back any of those figures. Russia took only about 500 sq km of territory in July, according to Western military analysts who say its grinding advances have come at the cost of very high casualties. Ukraine and its European allies have been haunted for months by the fear that Trump, keen to claim credit for making peace and hoping to seal lucrative joint business deals between the U.S. and Russia, could align with Putin to cut a deal that would be deeply disadvantageous to Kyiv. They had drawn some encouragement lately as Trump, having piled heavy pressure on Zelenskiy and berated him publicly in the Oval Office in February, began criticising Putin and expressing disgust as Russia pounded Kyiv and other cities with its heaviest air attacks of the war. But the impending Putin-Trump summit, agreed during a trip to Moscow by Trump's envoy Steve Witkoff last week, has revived fears that Kyiv and Europe could be sidelined. "What we will see emerge from Alaska will almost certainly be a catastrophe for Ukraine and Europe," wrote Phillips P. O'Brien, professor of strategic studies at the University of St Andrews in Scotland. "And Ukraine will face the most terrible dilemma. Do they accept this humiliating and destructive deal? Or do they go it alone, unsure of the backing of European states?"