Latest news with #E.P.A.
&w=3840&q=100)
Business Standard
3 days ago
- Politics
- Business Standard
US Environmental Protection Agency to scrap its scientific research arm
The Environmental Protection Agency said on Friday that it would eliminate its scientific research arm and begin firing hundreds of chemists, biologists, toxicologists and other scientists, after denying for months that it intended to do so. The move underscores how the Trump administration is forging ahead with efforts to slash the federal work force and dismantle federal agencies after the Supreme Court allowed these plans to proceed while legal challenges unfold. Government scientists have been particular targets of the administration's large-scale layoffs. The decision to dismantle the E.P.A.'s Office of Research and Development had been widely expected since March, when a leaked document that called for eliminating the office was first reported by The New York Times. But until Friday, the Trump administration maintained that no final decisions had been made. The E.P.A.'s science office provides the independent research that underpins nearly all of the agency's policies and regulations. It has analyzed the risks of hazardous chemicals, the impact of wildfire smoke on public health and the contamination of drinking water by hydraulic fracturing, or fracking. Its research has often justified stricter environmental rules, prompting pushback from chemical manufacturers and other industries. Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, has boasted about cutting dozens of environmental regulations, saying he wants to make it cheaper and easier for industries to operate. When President Trump took office, the science office had roughly 1,155 employees. But more than 325 workers have left since January after accepting 'deferred resignation' offers, according to an E.P.A. spokeswoman, Molly Vaseliou. It was not immediately clear how many of the roughly 830 remaining employees would be fired. Ms. Vaseliou said in an email that the agency had not yet initiated the large-scale layoff, known as a 'reduction in force.' The American Federation of Government Employees Council 238, a union that represents more than 8,000 E.P.A. workers, slammed Friday's announcement. The science office 'is the heart and brain of the E.P.A.,' said Justin Chen, president of A.F.G.E. Council 238. 'Without it, we don't have the means to assess impacts upon human health and the environment. Its destruction will devastate public health in our country.' In a wave of departures in recent weeks, the directors of national research programs under the Office of Research and Development all left the E.P.A. They include career employees who oversaw work on measuring contaminants in the atmosphere, responses to environmental emergencies and exposure to chemicals and particulate matter. Others who left include the deputies of those programs, as well as dozens of senior scientists, according to multiple agency officials. 'It is dismantling a world-class organisation, and the American people are not going to be well served by this,' said Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, who worked at the E.P.A. for 40 years and led the research office under the first Trump administration. 'These actions are very shortsighted, and the way they're going about it is very callous and very cruel.' When Trump took office, the E.P.A. had 16,155 employees. But more than 3,700 employees have left the agency or are set to leave through firings, retirements, resignations and other moves, eventually bringing the agency's work force to 12,448, a level last seen during the Reagan administration. The Trump administration previously announced that it would move some of the science functions into a new department in the E.P.A. administrator's office. Dr Orme-Zavaleta and others said that move threatened to politicize scientific research. Chris Jahn, president of the American Chemistry Council, a lobbying group for the chemical industry, said in a statement that the organisation 'supports E.P.A. evaluating its resources to ensure American taxpayer dollars are being used efficiently and effectively.' The Heritage Foundation, a conservative research organization, had criticised the E.P.A.'s science office in Project 2025, a blueprint for overhauling the federal government. The group had accused the office of being 'bloated, unaccountable, closed, outcome-driven, hostile to public and legislative input, and inclined to pursue political rather than purely scientific goals.' The Competitive Enterprise Institute, another conservative research organisation, has called for eliminating or overhauling the office's program for evaluating toxic chemicals, known as the Integrated Risk Information System, or IRIS. 'IRIS evaluations often rely on worst-case hazard assumptions that fail to consider real-world exposure scenarios,' James Broughel, a former senior fellow at the Competitive Enterprise Institute, wrote in a recent blog post. Broughel is now associated with the America First Policy Institute, a conservative think tank closely aligned with the Trump administration. The E.P.A. said in a news release on Friday that it had already saved $748.8 million through 'organizational improvements' and staff reductions. Zeldin said in the news release that agency officials were committed to 'being responsible stewards of your hard-earned tax dollars.' The E.P.A. plans to hold a 'town hall' for staff members in the science office on Monday afternoon, according to a Friday evening email from Maureen Gwinn, the acting head of the office, a copy of which was reviewed by The New York Times. 'I understand that this announcement may bring uncertainty and concern,' Dr. Gwinn wrote. 'While I don't have all the details yet, I am actively working to gather more information.' She concluded the email with a reminder: 'Please remember to take care of yourselves.'
New York Times
30-06-2025
- Politics
- New York Times
E.P.A. Workers Warn Trump Is Politicizing Their Work
More than 270 employees of the Environmental Protection Agency signed a letter on Monday denouncing what they described as the Trump administration's efforts to politicize, dismantle and sideline the main federal agency tasked with protecting the environment and public health. The letter to President Trump's E.P.A. administrator, Lee Zeldin, was a remarkable rebuke of the agency's political leadership. It followed a similar missive sent this month by more than 60 employees of the National Institutes of Health, who criticized orders they saw as illegal and unethical. 'E.P.A. employees join in solidarity with employees across the federal government in opposing this administration's policies, including those that undermine the E.P.A. mission of protecting human health and the environment,' the E.P.A. workers wrote. The four-page document outlined five overarching concerns with the Trump administration's approach to the E.P.A. The top complaint was that decisions had been made based on a political agenda, not on science and the law. Recent E.P.A. news releases and newsletters have parroted some of Mr. Trump's rhetoric on the environment, the letter said. For example, these materials have praised coal as 'beautiful' and 'clean.' Coal is the dirtiest of the fossil fuels and is a significant source of greenhouse gases. Statements from the E.P.A. have also routinely referred to climate grants issued under the Biden administration as a 'green slush fund,' when there has been no evidence they were used for illicit purposes. 'I've never seen this kind of partisanship, even in the first Trump administration,' said Justin Chen, an environmental engineer in the E.P.A.'s Dallas-based Region 6 office who signed the letter. Mr. Chen emphasized that he was speaking in his personal capacity and not on behalf of his E.P.A. office. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
Yahoo
15-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Trump Admin Plans to Delay, Eliminate Limits on ‘Forever Chemicals' in U.S. Drinking Water
The Trump administration announced on Wednesday that it plans to eliminate and postpone rules aimed at reducing 'forever chemicals' contaminating drinking water across the country. According to the Environmental Protection Agency (E.P.A), exposure to PFAS — a class of highly toxic, long-lasting compounds also known as 'forever chemicals' — has been linked to cancer, decreased fertility in women, developmental effects in children, immune system issues, interference with the body's natural hormones, and more. At least 45 percent of America's tap water is estimated to have one or more types of PFAS. Last year, former President Joe Biden set first-ever limits on PFAS, requiring water utilities to begin bringing down contamination levels of six types of PFAS chemicals — while setting a strict limit of four parts per trillion for two of those chemicals, PFOA and PFOS. Despite the plethora of research warning against the dangers of forever chemicals in water, the E.P.A. said that while it will uphold the limits for those two types of PFAS, it will extend a deadline requiring water utilities to meet those limits to 2031. The E.P.A. also said it plans to eliminate and reconsider the limits for the other four chemicals — PFHxS, PFNA, HFPO-DA, and PFBS — listed.'We are on a path to uphold the agency's nationwide standards to protect Americans from PFOA and PFOS in their water,' Lee Zeldin, the E.P.A. administrator, said in a statement. 'At the same time, we will work to provide common-sense flexibility in the form of additional time for compliance. This will support water systems across the country, including small systems in rural communities, as they work to address these contaminants.' President Donald Trump and his allies have escalated attacks on clean water protections. Through E.P.A. deregulations and cuts, Supreme Court rulings, executive orders, and bills in Congress, Trump and conservatives are systematically eroding rules aimed at providing Americans with clean, healthy water. In March, Zeldin said he would look to significantly reduce a significant portion of the waterways, such as wetlands, rivers, and streams, that are protected under the Clean Water Act, a 1972 law that regulates the discharge of pollutants in water. Trump's Office of Management and Budget separately withdrew a proposed EPA rule in January to set limits on the discharge of forever chemicals in wastewater. The president's administration did so based on Trump's executive order on Day One freezing all regulations in progress pending review. 'This agenda to deregulate, this agenda to gut the federal government, to dismantle the federal government, eliminate core functions of our government, remove these protections, it's just an ideology,' Mary Grant, Public Water for All Campaign Director at the nonprofit Food and Water Watch, previously told Rolling Stone. 'And they're acting on it without without care for how it impacts people, for how it impacts our access to safe water.' More from Rolling Stone 10 Terrible Policies in Trump and the GOP's Bill to Cut Taxes for the Rich Robert De Niro Drags Trump, Calls Art 'Threat to Autocrats' in Cannes Speech Trump's ICE Used a Woman's Kids and Grandchild as 'Bait' to Arrest Her Best of Rolling Stone The Useful Idiots New Guide to the Most Stoned Moments of the 2020 Presidential Campaign Anatomy of a Fake News Scandal The Radical Crusade of Mike Pence
Yahoo
07-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
Why would Trump's EPA shut down the successful Energy Star program?
If you've ever shopped for appliances — refrigerators, dishwashers, even computers — you've probably noticed the blue star on the box, letting consumers know that the product meets the government's energy efficiency standards. That label is part of the Energy Star program, and for more than three decades, it hasn't been controversial in the slightest. Nevertheless, during Donald Trump's first term as president, the Republican White House unveiled a budget plan that eliminated the Energy Star program, for reasons the administration struggled to explain. The industry backlash was swift: Exactly eight years ago this week, The Associated Press reported that more than 1,000 U.S. companies, including some of the nation's largest manufacturers, urged policymakers to preserve the program. The AP's report added at the time, 'The program costs about $50 million per year to administer, while saving consumers more than $34 billion per year in reduced energy costs.' In 2017, the lobbying campaign succeeded, and the Energy Star program lived to see another day. Eight years later, as The New York Times reported, Trump and his EPA are apparently eager to finish the job: The Environmental Protection Agency plans to eliminate Energy Star, the popular energy efficiency certification for dishwashers, refrigerators, dryers and other home appliances, according to agency documents and a recording of an internal meeting. E.P.A. managers announced during a staff meeting on Monday that divisions that oversee climate change and energy efficiency would be eliminated as part of an agency reorganization. That includes the E.P.A.'s climate change office as well as the division that oversees Energy Star. According to a recording obtained by the Times, Paul Gunning, the director of the EPA's Office of Atmospheric Protection, told employees, 'The Energy Star program and all the other climate work, outside of what's required by statute, is being de-prioritized and eliminated.' (The reporting has not been independently verified by MSNBC or NBC News.) An EPA spokeswoman did not confirm that the program was being eliminated. She told the Times that the EPA had announced 'organizational improvements to the personnel structure that will directly benefit the American people and better advance the agency's core mission.' Note, eight years ago, the Republican administration set out to zero out the Energy Star program through the budgetary process. In 2025, however, Team Trump is apparently taking a more direct and unilateral approach, overhauling the EPA's structure and scrapping the offices that oversee the project. There is no constituency for such a move. Support for the Energy Star program has long been bipartisan — it was created under George H.W. Bush's presidency — and it's one of only a handful of landmark energy policies that have been celebrated by environmentalists and industry advocates alike. It costs almost nothing to administer, and it's delivered massive annual savings every year for decades. The Times' report added that Energy Star 'has helped households and businesses save more than $500 billion in energy costs and to get rebates and tax credits, according to the program's 2024 report. At the same time, it has also prevented four billion metric tons of greenhouse gases from being released into the atmosphere.' Even from a conservative perspective, this is precisely the kind of public-private partnership that the right has championed for many years. No one, in other words, would benefit from this kind of change. So if the Times' reporting is correct, why in the world is this happening? By all appearances, it's because much of the modern Republican Party has embraced the idea that taking energy efficiency seriously is ridiculous. We've seen overwhelming evidence of this among GOP lawmakers on Capitol Hill in recent years — see the 'Refrigerator Freedom Act,' the 'Liberty in Laundry Act,' the 'Stop Unaffordable Dishwasher Standards Act,' the 'Clothes Dryers Reliability Act,' et al. — and the same perspective has clearly been embraced at the White House. There was a time when the so-called 'culture war' focused on abortion and LGBTQ+ rights. In contemporary politics, however, energy efficiency has been added to the list. This article was originally published on
New York Times
05-05-2025
- Business
- New York Times
18 States Sue Over Trump's Halting of Wind Power Projects
Eighteen states sued the Trump administration Monday over its halting of permits for wind-energy projects, arguing that its actions posed an existential threat to the burgeoning industry. 'This administration is devastating one of our nation's fastest-growing sources of clean, reliable and affordable energy,' said Attorney General Letitia James of New York, which is one of the plaintiffs. She said the halt threatened 'the loss of thousands of good-paying jobs and billions in investments' and was 'delaying our transition away from the fossil fuels that harm our health and our planet.' The halt on federal permits for wind energy was first laid out in a Jan. 20 executive order, one of a barrage that President Trump signed immediately upon taking office. It directed agencies to stop all permits for wind farms pending federal review. The lawsuit says that, by complying, federal agencies have put major investments that have already been made at risk. The order also instructed the United States attorney general and the interior secretary to explore 'terminating or amending' existing leases to wind farms, further increasing uncertainty for companies. The wind industry provides about 10 percent of the nation's electricity, and has many new projects under development, particularly in the Great Plains and the Atlantic Ocean. Last month, the Trump administration halted a major wind farm under construction off the coast of Long Island, the Empire Wind project. It was designed to provide enough electricity to power a half-million homes. It had already received the permits it needed, but Interior Secretary Doug Burgum suggested the Biden administration's analysis during the approval process was rushed and insufficient. Ms. James noted that Mr. Trump had also declared an energy emergency. Energy experts have called that declaration overstated. Nevertheless, she said, the moratorium on wind permits is harming the ability to provide a new source of energy. New York also has a new law on the books requiring it to dramatically increase the amount of electricity that comes from renewable sources. Achieving that goal will become more complicated without wind sources. The lawsuit names numerous federal officials and agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency and the Interior Department. The E.P.A. didn't immediately respond to a request for comment. Taylor Rogers, a White House spokeswoman, accused the Democratic attorneys general who sued of using 'lawfare' to thwart the president's energy agenda. 'Americans in blue states should not have to pay the price of the Democrats' radical climate agenda,' she said. The Interior Department said in a statement that it was committed to 'overseeing public lands and waters for the benefit of all Americans, while prioritizing fiscal responsibility for the American people.' The lawsuit, filed in federal court in Massachusetts, asks a judge to prevent federal agencies from taking any action to block wind-energy development and to declare the executive order unlawful. 'The Trump administration's directive to halt the development of offshore wind energy is illegal,' said Rob Bonta, the attorney general of California. His office said the federal policy would 'derail the clean energy transition' and lead to higher costs for Americans. In addition to onshore wind sites, the state has five federal offshore wind leases, the office said. Offshore operations are more complicated and expensive to operate. ClearView Energy Partners, a Washington consulting firm, said that it expected the lawsuit to face an 'uphill climb' in convincing the court to block the executive order. The firm's 'best-case scenario' for the offshore wind industry is that facilities that are already operating, or far along in development, may continue without opposition from the Trump administration, it said.
