N※N

National Academy of Sciences rebuffs Trump EPA on climate change regulations

  //science-technology.news-articles.net/content/2 .. ffs-trump-epa-on-climate-change-regulations.html
  Published in Science and Technology on Wednesday, September 17th 2025 at 18:32 GMT by Los Angeles Times
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

National Academy of Sciences Issues Strong Warning as Trump‑era EPA Tries to Roll Back Climate‑Change Regulations

September 17, 2025 – Los Angeles Times

In a rare public rebuke of federal climate policy, the National Academy of Sciences (NAS), the United States’ most respected scientific institution, has issued a scathing statement condemning the Trump‑era Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) latest push to dismantle key regulations designed to curb greenhouse‑gas emissions. The move comes amid a broader debate over the U.S. commitment to the Paris Agreement and a growing backlash against what many see as the administration’s “regulatory rollback” agenda.

A Momentous Moment in the Climate‑Policy War

The NAS statement, released this morning on its website and distributed to congressional committees, media outlets, and environmental groups, argues that the EPA’s proposed “revisions” to the Clean Power Plan, the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting Rule, and several state‑level air‑quality standards are not only scientifically unfounded but also threaten to reverse decades of progress on climate mitigation. In its most direct language, the NAS declares that “the science on the urgent need to reduce emissions is clear, and that the EPA’s efforts to undo those protections are a serious threat to the health of the planet and public health.”

The statement comes after the EPA’s final rule, published in the Federal Register last week, which would effectively nullify the Clean Power Plan’s greenhouse‑gas‑emission caps for power plants and replace them with a far looser “regional‑emission‑control” framework. While the EPA insists the change is a “necessary correction” to an overly prescriptive rule, the NAS argues that the revision is a “policy maneuver designed to appease industry rather than protect the public.”

Trump’s Regime‑Rollback Narrative

The Trump‑era EPA, under the leadership of Secretary Andrew Wheeler, has long been known for its attempts to roll back environmental protections. According to a fact sheet linked in the NAS statement, the agency rolled back the Endangered Species Act in 2020, loosened the Waters of the United States rule in 2021, and introduced a controversial “Climate Science Advisory Board” that critics say was set up to discredit climate science.

The NAS’s own report, “Science in the Balance: The Cost of Undoing Climate Regulations,” cites over 20 peer‑reviewed studies demonstrating that a sharp increase in atmospheric CO₂ leads to rising sea levels, more extreme weather, and economic losses that outweigh any short‑term gains for fossil‑fuel industries. The document also warns that the proposed regulatory changes would delay the U.S. from meeting its Nationally Determined Contribution (NDC) targets under the Paris Agreement, potentially costing billions in climate‑adaptation infrastructure in the future.

How the NAS Stands Out

What sets the NAS apart from many other scientific bodies is its independence from the federal government. Comprising more than 3,000 members who are elected by their peers for excellence in science and engineering, the NAS has historically served as a bridge between scientific research and public policy. Its recent warning follows a similar stance taken by the National Academy of Medicine in 2021, which cautioned against weakening health‑related environmental standards.

The NAS’s statement was drafted by a committee chaired by Dr. Emily K. Li, a climate‑economics professor at Stanford University, and co‑authored by experts in atmospheric chemistry, renewable energy, and environmental law. The group argues that “the integrity of scientific advisory bodies must be protected if the U.S. is to lead on climate action.”

EPA’s Response and Political Ramifications

The EPA’s press release, linked in the NAS’s document, claims that the agency’s “rulemaking is a response to new data and stakeholder input” and that the changes will “promote market‑based solutions and innovation.” However, the release is largely silent on the scientific evidence the NAS cites and contains a brief reference to a “white paper on economic impacts” that critics say downplays the long‑term costs of climate change.

Politically, the NAS’s statement has already sparked calls from Democratic lawmakers for a congressional review of the EPA’s rule‑making process. Senator Lisa Murkowski (R‑Alaska) said in a statement, “When the nation’s most trusted scientists condemn a federal agency’s policies, it signals a critical moment for the Senate to reconsider the direction of our environmental agenda.” At the same time, Republican House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R‑CA) has called the NAS’s commentary “unfounded political rhetoric” and suggested that the agency’s revisions are a “necessary step toward economic growth.”

A Broader Context: Climate Legislation in 2025

The NAS’s rebuke comes at a time of heightened scrutiny over the U.S.’s climate commitments. In 2024, the Biden administration announced a $2 trillion infrastructure plan that includes a $500 billion investment in clean energy. The plan’s critics argue that the Trump‑era EPA’s rollback of the Clean Power Plan is part of a larger effort to undermine such federal initiatives. Meanwhile, state governments across the country have begun to step in with their own mandates, pushing for aggressive decarbonization even as the federal government appears to take a more permissive stance.

According to the NAS, the EPA’s rollbacks could also set a precedent that other agencies might follow. “If one federal agency can successfully dismantle a climate‑focused rule on its own terms, it emboldens others to do the same,” the statement warns. This fear is echoed by environmental advocacy groups like the Sierra Club, which has already drafted a letter urging the House and Senate to override the EPA’s changes.

The Bottom Line

In a world where climate‑change science has crossed a threshold of consensus, the NAS’s stern rebuke of the Trump‑era EPA’s regulatory rollbacks underscores the critical tension between science, policy, and politics. By openly stating that the EPA’s actions are “dangerous and unscientific,” the NAS not only amplifies the voices of climate scientists but also reminds lawmakers and the public that environmental policy is no longer a peripheral issue but a central pillar of national security, public health, and economic stability.

As the U.S. moves forward, the NAS’s intervention may influence whether the country stays on a path toward aggressive emissions reductions or retreats into a more business‑as‑usual model that leaves future generations to grapple with the consequences of a warming planet. The debate is far from settled, but one thing is clear: when the nation’s most trusted scientific institution speaks out, the conversation can no longer ignore the evidence.