An illustration of a dying tree in the shape of a head with a very long nose.

Trump administration escalates push to discredit mainstream climate science

The Trump administration is planning a public campaign to undermine federal climate science, including holding debates and making revisions to government reports, based on a controversial new U.S. Energy Department document.

Scott Waldman reports for E&E News.

In short:

A new Department of Energy report, written by five scientists including former BP chief scientist Steven Koonin, challenges the consensus that fossil fuels are driving global warming and argues that climate change may be less economically damaging than widely believed.
The administration plans to expand this effort with public debates, a point-by-point rebuttal of the National Climate Assessment, and an attempt to include more contrarian voices in federal climate reporting.
Many climate scientists argue the DOE report misrepresents their work and recycles discredited claims; they see the campaign as a political maneuver to weaken climate regulations and justify overturning the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's endangerment finding.

Key quote:

“The notion that they have not been part of the community and have not had the opportunity to convince others of the correctness of their arguments is just plain wrong. The bottom line is, they haven’t succeeded in defending the arguments that they now present in the DOE report.”

— Ben Santer, a climate scientist who worked at DOE for 30 years before retiring in 2021

Why this matters:

Efforts to sow doubt about climate science can shape public understanding and policy for years, especially when driven by government institutions. The strategy of amplifying uncertainty rather than engaging with established scientific findings has long been used to delay regulatory action. Undermining the National Climate Assessment, which informs federal planning on everything from infrastructure to disaster response, risks weakening the nation’s ability to prepare for and mitigate the effects of a warming planet. Discrediting peer-reviewed science could sideline the evidence needed to make informed decisions in the face of mounting environmental and health risks.

www.eenews.net

Trump administration escalates push to discredit mainstream climate science

Supreme Court to hear case on Louisiana’s eroding coast

Big Oil knows that Trump’s Venezuela plans are delusional

How Chevron played the long game in Venezuela

Satellite images reveal Venezuela’s massive methane problem

Australia’s Cop31 chief negotiator plans to lobby petrostates on fossil fuel phaseout

Sinking trees in Arctic Ocean could remove 1 billion tons of CO2

Carbon pawprint: Your dog’s dinner may have a greater climate impact than your own

Multiple Houston-area oil and gas facilities that have violated pollution laws are seeking permit renewals

One facility has emitted cancer-causing chemicals into waterways at levels up to 520% higher than legal limits.

Pennsylvania health advocates say Trump’s first 100 days in office have caused “100 harms” to local communities

“They're terrorizing these scientists because they want to keep them silent.”

Regulators are underestimating health impacts from air pollution: Study

"The reality is, we are not exposed to one chemical at a time.”

Two years into his term, has Gov. Shapiro kept his promises to regulate Pennsylvania’s fracking industry?

A new report assesses the administration’s progress and makes new recommendations

An open letter from EPA staff to the American public

“We cannot stand by and allow this to happen. We need to hold this administration accountable.”

New evidence links heavy metal pollution with wildfire retardants

“The chemical black box” that blankets wildfire-impacted areas is increasingly under scrutiny.