Washington – in the potential breakthrough boss Environmental Protection Agency Privately, he called Trump administration Consider the scientific discovery again, which has long been the main basis for American activities against climate change.
In the report to the White House, EPA Reading the Zeldin administrator According to four people who were informed that at the state of the agency at the discretion of agencies, which decisive insulating planets of greenhouse gases threatened with public health and social welfare have announced the Associated Press in terms of anonymity, because the recommendation is not public.
Finding in 2009 on the basis of the Clean Air Act is a legal basis for climate regulations for motor vehicles, power plants and other sources of pollution.
On Wednesday, the EPA spokesman refused to disclose Zeldin’s recommendation, which was made last week under executive order from Republican President Donald Trump. The order, issued on the first day of the Trump Office, recommended EPA to present the report “On the subject of legality and the constant possibility of applying” the threat.
Washington Post for the first time announced that Zeldin called the White House to find a threat.
The discovery from the Obama era is “is a linear policy of the federal government for what we and the president call climate mystification,” said Steve Milloy, former adviser to Trump Transition, who questions the science of climate change.
“If you pull it out (you will discover), everything that EPA does on the climate disappears,” said Mylloy Ap.
Trump, at the meeting of the office on Wednesday, told him that Zeldin told him that he was moving to eliminate about 65% of EPA working strength. “Many people who did not do their work were just an obstacle,” said Trump.
Myron Ebell, another former adviser to Trump Transition, who questioned the science related to climate change, said on Wednesday that he was “very excited” by Zeldin’s apparent recommendation regarding the threat.
“This is the basis of all the principles of harmful economic regulation of carbon dioxide,” Ebell said, calling “a difficult step, but a very big step.”
Environmental groups and legal experts said that any attempt to repeal or withdraw a threat would be uphill with a little chance of success.
“It would be a fool matter,” said David Doniger, climate expert at Natural Resources Defense Council, a group of the environment. “In the face of overwhelming science, one cannot think that EPA may develop a contradictory finding that will stand in court.”
Trump, who repeatedly condemned what he calls the “green new fraud” pushed by democrats and ecologists, can perceive the repeal of the threat as “killing”, which would allow him to make all climatic recipes, said Doniger.
“But this is a really long shot for them,” he added, noting that the courts repeatedly maintained EPA rights to regulate greenhouse gas pollution under the neat air act.
“In order to re -consider finding a threat, the directive comes straight from the 2025 project and is both cynical and deeply disturbing, taking into account the mountain of scientific evidence supporting the discovery, the destructive damage to the climate that Americans experience now, and EPA is obliged to protect Americans” health and social care “,” said Peter Zalzal, an older environment, another environment.
Project 2025The almost 1000-page plan for a earnest return in the American government and society contains a recommendation to consider finding a threat again.
Zeldin, a former Republican Congressmen from Long Island in New York, was a longtime ally of Trump, but he had little environmental experience before he was called to the position of EPA. During the trial confirming in January, sparring with Senator Ed Markey, D-Mass, in accordance with the decision of the Supreme Court, which led to the threat.
In the 2007 decision on Massachusetts against EPA, the court ruled that the agency is entitled to regulate greenhouse gases as air pollution pursuant to the Clean Air Act. Markey called this decision a “mandate” for EPA in order to protect public health against climate pollution, the point questioned by Zeldin.
“The decision does not require EPA to” work on greenhouse gases, “allows it”, Zeldin told Markey. “There are steps that EPA would have to take on the obligation to be created.”
Ann Carlson, a professor of environmental law at UCLA School of Law, said that all efforts to repeal the statement of threat would “increase havoc – part of the general administration strategy consisting in flooding the zone” with messy activities and directives.
“Science could not be clearer, that greenhouse gas emissions have already led to the ground to warm up – so much that it seemed that we violated the limit of 1.5 Celsius” determined by the global community in the climate agreement in Paris in 2015, said Carlson.
“We see the impact of climate change on earth and around the world in the form of warmer temperatures, more frequent drought, more intense floods, fierce hurricanes and more intense fires,” she said, said, she said,
If the statement of the threat is torn, “havoc will take place earlier and matures more,” she said.
A scientist from the University of Pennsylvania Michael Mann called EPA “the latest form of republican climate denial. They can no longer deny climate change, so instead they pretend that this is not a threat, despite the overwhelming scientific evidence, that it may be the greatest threat we are struggling with today. “
“The concept that greenhouse gases do not threaten public health and prosperity by causing climate change is ridiculous,” added Michael Oppenheimer, a professor of geology and international affairs at the University of Princeton. Climate change caused by the pollution of greenhouse gas “already interrupts life, as we knew in the last century and threatens much worse. Believe it is fantasy differently. “
