America’s Deregulation Push Could Jeopardize Net Zero Goals
After years of pursuing ambitious climate policies, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is re-evaluating its approach to greenhouse gas regulations. Administrator Lee Zeldin recently announced that the agency is reconsidering the landmark 2009 “endangerment finding,” which classified greenhouse gases as pollutants.
This development could have profound implications. The endangerment finding serves as the foundation for numerous regulations affecting the automotive and power industries. If overturned, a future Trump administration could dismantle many costly environmental regulations implemented over the past 15 years without direct Congressional approval, potentially reducing energy and transportation costs.
The Origin of the Endangerment Finding
The roots of the endangerment finding trace back to 2007 when the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Clean Air Act granted the EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane, if they posed a threat to public health. In 2009, during Barack Obama’s presidency, the EPA determined that six greenhouse gases were indeed harmful, paving the way for an array of climate regulations that not only shaped U.S. policy but also influenced global efforts to achieve net zero emissions. However, these regulations increased manufacturing costs in Western nations and encouraged offshoring to Asia, often without effectively reducing overall global emissions.
The 2009 endangerment finding was based on data from the Fourth Assessment Report of the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) published in 2007. Since then, substantial new research has emerged. The IPCC’s Sixth Assessment Report, released in 2022, presents updated findings that may challenge some of the assumptions underpinning the original determination.
Changing Legal Landscape and New Scientific Evidence
Recent Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the authority of executive agencies, requiring them to adhere strictly to legislative mandates. This shift limits the EPA’s ability to interpret laws beyond their explicit scope, reinforcing that Congress has never directly authorized the EPA to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.
If the EPA ultimately concludes that greenhouse gases no longer pose the threats identified in 2009, many regulations could be rescinded, potentially saving trillions of dollars. For example, the cost of an average new car has nearly doubled, rising from $23,000 in 2009 to almost $50,000 today, partly due to stringent environmental standards.
Administrator Zeldin emphasized that the agency’s decisions will be guided by “science, the law, and common sense,” while maintaining a commitment to ensuring cleaner air, water, and land.
Broad Support for Revisiting the Finding
The administration has signaled a unified stance on re-evaluating the endangerment finding. Leaders from the Departments of Energy, Transportation, and Interior, along with the White House’s Office of Management and Budget and Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, have expressed their support.
Transportation Secretary Duffy remarked that reassessing the endangerment finding would enable the Department of Transportation to revise vehicle fuel economy standards, potentially lowering car prices and giving consumers greater choice, rather than pushing them toward electric vehicles.
Far-Reaching Consequences of Deregulation
Regulations linked to the endangerment finding include Obama’s Clean Power Plan, which aimed to shut down coal plants before being struck down by the Supreme Court in West Virginia v. EPA, as well as auto emissions standards that could have mandated 70% of new cars be electric by 2032. Regulations on methane emissions from farms are also tied to this framework. However, the assumptions behind these policies have been refined and updated since 2009.
Critics argue that the endangerment finding has been used as a political instrument to exert control over the U.S. economy by empowering regulators to determine which industries thrive or decline. This has led to subsidies and resource redistribution that distort market dynamics. On a global scale, these regulations have driven deindustrialization in Europe and hindered countries in Latin America and Africa from capitalizing on their fossil fuel resources.
Revisiting Science and Safeguarding Democracy
The U.S. environmental regulatory system is built on scientific assessments from the early years of Obama’s presidency. Yet, as former Department of Energy Undersecretary Steve Koonin highlighted in his book Unsettled, climate science remains an evolving field, and premature conclusions should be avoided.
Ultimately, policymakers should not have the authority to reshape the American economy without public and legislative approval. The EPA’s decision to reconsider the endangerment finding signals a significant shift that could influence the nation’s environmental trajectory. For now, industries, farmers, and consumers may have reason to breathe a little easier.