
www.apnews.com
18 June 2018
Global warming cooks up 'a different world' over 3 decades
We were warned. In June '88 James Hansen said global warming was here & would worsen. It did. First in a series.
“We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to hold this administration accountable.”
Editor’s note: This op-ed was written by a group of current and former employees of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), who have asked to remain anonymous due to concerns about retaliation.
The Trump administration ismaking accusations of fraud, waste, and abuse associated with federal environmental justice programs under the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) as justification for firing federal workers and defunding critical environmental programs. But the real waste, fraud, and abuse would be to strip away these funds from the American people.
As current and former employees at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) who developed and implemented the agency’s environmental justice funding and grant programs, we want to offer our first-hand insights about the efficiency and importance of this work. This is not about defending our paychecks. This is about protecting the health of our communities.
IRA funding is often described as a “once-in-a-generation investment,” puttingbillions of dollars toward improving the lives of American families in red, blue, and purple states. Working with communities, we’ve been placing these resources directly into their hands, supporting people to better protect the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land where we live, learn, work, play, and grow — including key protections from natural disasters.
As civil servants, we took an oath to protect and invest in the American public. We are committed to providing effective programs and being responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars, and there are many policies in place to ensure our accountability. But despite our careful planning and oversight, the new administration is halting programs Americans depend on for their health and wellbeing.
We should work together to demand that the Trump administration restore this critical funding back to the people.
The Bush administration introduced environmental equity (and justice) programming to the EPA in the 1990s. EPA staff working on environmental justice programs partnered with communities to meet their needs and used rigorous systems to track funds and results.
The Trump administration recently paused many of these environmental justice programsthat fund community-led projects like air, water, and soil testing; training and workforce development; construction or cleanup projects; gardens and tree planting; and preparing and responding to natural disasters. Other examples of the EPA’s environmental justice programs include providing safe shelters during and after hurricanes, land cleanups to reduce communities’ exposure to harmful pollutants, and providing water filters to protect residents from lead in drinking water.
This administration has halted funds,claiming “the objectives of the awards are no longer consistent with EPA funding priorities.” In reality, these funds were approved by Congress, and these grants remain in alignment with the agency’s mission to protect human health and the environment. Even though there are court orders to unfreeze billions of dollars in federal grants, the Trump administration continues towithhold this critical money from the people who need it most.
We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to hold this administration accountable to serving the American people, applying the same mandates that we have held our federal workforce and grant recipients to: follow the law, follow the science, and be transparent.
Credit: Ellie Storms/Unsplash
Some grant recipients who have lost access to EPA funding had already been working for more than a year onprojects that must now be paused. Many recipients have hired local employees and made commitments in their communities.
Now that funds are being pulled back, these organizations have had to lay off staff, pause local contracts with private companies and small businesses, and shut down community-driven projects. These attacks will impact the integrity of programs funded by our hard-earned tax dollars and take money away from communities across the country.
By withholding promised funding and terminating existing contracts, the Trump administration is exposing the EPA to increased risks of litigation. Relationships that were built through years of meaningful engagement between communities and the federal government are being jeopardized. Organizations, institutions, and companies will likely shy away from future federal grant or contracting opportunities because no one wants to work with someone who doesn’t pay their bills and backs out on their promises.
It is a waste of taxpayer dollars for the U.S. Government to cancel its agreements with grantees and contractors. It is fraud for the U.S. Government to delay payments for services already received. And it is an abuse of power for the Trump administration to block the IRA laws that were mandated by Congress.
It can feel impossible to keep up with the news right now, but this story touches all of us. We should pay attention to what’s going on in our communities and find ways to stay engaged, like attending town halls to hear about the local impacts of federal policies and making your voice heard.
If you are interested in advocating for the return of federal funding to the American people, we urge you to:
Greenpeace has been ordered to pay $667 million to the company behind the Dakota Access Pipeline after a North Dakota jury found the environmental group defamed the company, a verdict that could have sweeping consequences for advocacy and free speech.
In short:
Key quote:
“We should all be concerned about the future of the First Amendment, and lawsuits like this aimed at destroying our rights to peaceful protest and free speech.”
— Deepa Padmanabha, senior legal counsel for Greenpeace USA
Why this matters:
Beyond the courtroom, the stakes are high. This case isn’t just about Greenpeace — it’s about the future of environmental protest in an era of escalating climate crisis. If the ruling stands, the next time a pipeline spills or a fossil fuel project threatens communities, who will dare to sound the alarm?
Read more:
The potential elimination of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Research and Development could result in mass layoffs of scientists and weaken the agency’s ability to assess and respond to environmental threats.
In short:
Key quote:
"It took decades to build it. It will take decades to rebuild it."
— Jennifer Orme-Zavaleta, former principal deputy assistant administrator, EPA Office of Research and Development
Why this matters:
The EPA relies on scientific research to set regulations that protect public health and the environment. Proposed budget cuts to its research division could weaken the agency’s ability to detect and respond to environmental hazards, from industrial chemicals to climate-related disasters. Without independent studies, regulations may become more reactive than preventive, potentially exposing communities to unregulated pollutants and slowing responses to crises like chemical spills and harmful algal blooms.
Supporters of the cuts argue that regulatory decisions should lean more on industry-led research or state-level initiatives, while critics warn that weakening federal research could lead to regulatory capture, where industries influence policies in their favor. With climate-related disasters on the rise and concerns over water and air quality persisting, experts caution that reducing the EPA’s scientific capacity could leave the country less prepared to address emerging environmental threats.
Read more: Trump administration moves to dismantle EPA’s science office
A federal judge has temporarily stopped the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency from taking back $20 billion in climate grants awarded during the Biden administration, delaying the Trump administration’s effort to roll back past clean-energy investments.
In short:
Key quote:
“Based on the record before the court, and under the relevant statutes and various agreements, it does not appear that EPA Defendants took the legally required steps necessary to terminate these grants, such that its actions were arbitrary and capricious.”
— U.S. District Judge Tanya Chutkan
Why this matters:
The ruling represents yet another flashpoint in the ongoing battle over U.S. climate policy. At the heart of the dispute is $20 billion in clean energy funding — money that was intended to accelerate the transition to lower-carbon technologies, particularly in economically disadvantaged communities. The Trump administration’s broader rollback of Biden-era climate initiatives has been met with resistance from environmental groups and Democratic lawmakers, who argue that these funds are crucial for reducing emissions and stimulating green job growth.
Meanwhile, conservative policymakers and industry groups have questioned the necessity of such large-scale government spending, framing it as an inefficient use of taxpayer dollars. The case underscores the stark political divide over climate investments, with implications for both the energy sector and broader economic policy. As courts weigh in, the outcome could shape the trajectory of U.S. climate action in the years ahead.
Learn more: EPA defends freezing $20 billion in climate grants without new evidence
As climate change accelerates sea level rise and intensifies droughts, new research reveals that salt contamination from both ocean water and human activities is threatening freshwater resources.
In short:
Key quote:
"The interaction between human activities and climate change and climate variability is very, very important. It amplifies the salt pulses that we see from human activity."
— Sujay Kaushal, geologist at the University of Maryland
Why this matters:
Salt contamination in freshwater ecosystems is an increasingly urgent issue, driven by both natural forces and human activity. Rising sea levels, fueled by climate change, push saltwater further inland, threatening drinking water supplies, agriculture, and infrastructure. At the same time, road salt, industrial discharges, and wastewater contribute to elevated salinity levels in rivers and lakes.
In cities like Philadelphia, where millions depend on the Delaware River for drinking water, even small increases in salinity can corrode aging pipes, leading to infrastructure failures and potential health risks. Farmers face their own challenges, as salt-laden water degrades soil quality and reduces crop yields. The ecological consequences are equally severe — higher salinity levels disrupt freshwater ecosystems, harming fish populations and fueling harmful algal blooms that further degrade water quality. Climate change is accelerating these trends, making salt management a growing concern for policymakers, scientists, and communities. Without intervention, the problem could become increasingly difficult — and costly — to reverse.
Related: Rising saltwater contamination threatens health in coastal Bangladesh
Edelman, the world’s largest public relations agency, is in talks to support the upcoming UN climate summit in Brazil despite its previous work with a trade group accused of pushing for weaker Amazon protections.
In short:
Key quote:
“Edelman’s conflicts of interest at a climate conference are almost too many to count.”
— Duncan Meisel, executive director of Clean Creatives
Why this matters:
The Amazon rainforest plays a crucial role in regulating the global climate, yet it continues to face threats from deforestation driven by agriculture. Concerns are mounting over the influence of corporate interests on high-profile climate discussions. The decision to hire a public relations firm with ties to industries known for environmental rollbacks raises questions about the credibility of the summit’s messaging. If companies with a financial stake in deforestation gain sway over climate negotiations, the effectiveness of proposed protections could be compromised, critics warn.
This tension between economic growth and environmental stewardship is not new in Brazil, where the Amazon’s vast resources have long been a battleground between conservationists and industries seeking to exploit them. But with global climate targets at stake, the integrity of these discussions has implications far beyond the rainforest, affecting worldwide efforts to combat climate change.
Related: Amazon rainforest at risk of significant transformation by mid-century, study indicates
The World Meteorological Organization (WMO) confirmed that 2024 was the hottest year ever recorded, making the last 10 years the warmest in nearly two centuries of data collection.
In short:
Key quote:
“While a single year above 1.5 degrees C of warming does not indicate that the long-term temperature goals of the Paris Agreement are out of reach, it is a wake-up call that we are increasing the risks to our lives, economies and to the planet.”
— Celeste Saulo, secretary general of the WMO
Why this matters:
The planet is heating up at an alarming pace, and the consequences are becoming harder to ignore. Rising global temperatures are fueling more extreme weather events, from blistering heat waves to devastating hurricanes. One of the most striking effects is on the world’s oceans, which act as a giant heat sink, absorbing much of the excess warmth. But as ocean temperatures rise, so too does the threat to marine ecosystems — coral reefs are bleaching, fish populations are shifting, and sea levels are creeping higher, putting millions of people at risk.
At the same time, record-high greenhouse gas levels are setting the stage for more frequent and intense natural disasters. Droughts are becoming longer and more punishing, wildfires are spreading with greater ferocity, and storms are dumping historic amounts of rainfall. Scientists warn that without a dramatic reduction in emissions, these patterns will only worsen, making adaptation increasingly difficult. The changing climate isn’t just an abstract problem for future generations — it’s reshaping landscapes, economies, and communities in real time.
Read more: The world endured its hottest summer with devastating impacts
“The chemical black box” that blankets wildfire-impacted areas is increasingly under scrutiny.
We must prioritize minority-serving institutions, BIPOC-led organizations and researchers to lead environmental justice efforts.
Responses to the new rules have been mixed, and environmental advocates worry that Trump could undermine them.
Prisons, jails and detention centers are placed in locations where environmental hazards such as toxic landfills, floods and extreme heat are the norm.
The leadership team talks about what they’ve learned — and what lies ahead.
Top polluters are benefiting the most from tax breaks.