Trump Administration Revokes Key Climate Policy Foundation: The Endangerment Finding
For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, I’m Kendra Pierre-Louis, in for Rachel Feltman. Last week, the Trump administration announced its decision to rescind the “endangerment finding,” a critical legal and scientific determination that has underpinned U.S. federal climate policy since 2009. This action, as stated by President Donald Trump in a White House press briefing, aims to terminate a policy he deemed “a disastrous Obama-era policy that severely damaged the American auto industry and massively drove up prices for American consumers.” The move has significant implications for future climate action in the United States.
To understand the ramifications of this decision, we spoke with Andrea Thompson, senior desk editor for life science at Scientific American. Thompson explained that the endangerment finding is rooted in the Clean Air Act, legislation passed in the 1970s granting the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) the authority to regulate air pollutants impacting human health. The finding itself establishes the scientific and legal basis for classifying greenhouse gases as pollutants that endanger public welfare.
The Legal Origins of the Endangerment Finding
The genesis of the endangerment finding stemmed from a series of lawsuits filed by environmental groups and states. This legal challenge ultimately led to a landmark Supreme Court case in 2007, Massachusetts v. EPA. The court’s ruling affirmed that greenhouse gases, including carbon dioxide and methane, qualify as “air pollutants” under the Clean Air Act. Consequently, the EPA was legally obligated to develop and implement the endangerment finding, providing the foundation for subsequent regulations targeting greenhouse gas emissions.
Rescinding the Finding: Implications for Regulation
The recent action by the Trump administration effectively removes the legal requirement for the EPA to regulate greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act. While the immediate impact is primarily focused on regulations concerning cars and trucks, the decision could also have broader repercussions for other sectors of the economy. This rollback is projected to result in increased greenhouse gas emissions within the U.S., contributing to a global challenge where all nations share responsibility for mitigating climate change. As Andrea Thompson noted, the United States, as a historical leader in emissions, has a particular obligation to contribute to reducing these gases.
Extreme Weather and Climate Change: A Tangible Connection
The current weather patterns across the country—bitterly cold temperatures in the Northeast juxtaposed with unusually warm conditions in the West—highlight the increasingly erratic nature of climate-influenced weather events. Andrea Thompson further explained that these extreme fluctuations are linked to the weakening of the polar vortex, a high-altitude current of air that typically confines Arctic cold. When the polar vortex weakens, it allows frigid Arctic air to spill southward, while simultaneously allowing warmer air to surge northward, creating these contrasting regional conditions. These patterns can become persistent, influenced by geographical features like the Rockies and the Pacific coastline.
Discerning Reality in the Age of AI
Beyond climate science, the proliferation of artificial intelligence (AI) presents a new challenge: distinguishing between authentic information and AI-generated content. Recent viral images depicting wild horses in the Outer Banks of North Carolina being wrapped in fiberglass insulation proved to be fabricated, demonstrating the ease with which AI can create convincing, yet false, visuals. Recognizing this growing concern, governments worldwide are exploring policies, such as the European Union’s AI Act, which mandates labeling of AI-generated content to promote transparency. However, a recent study published in PNAS Nexus suggests that simply labeling content as AI-generated may not be sufficient to curb the spread of misinformation.
The Curious Case of "Penisgate" and Olympic Ski Jumping
Finally, a bizarre scandal involving Olympic ski jumpers, dubbed “Penisgate,” underscores the lengths to which athletes will go to gain a competitive edge. The controversy revolves around allegations that some jumpers injected their penises with hyaluronic acid, a substance commonly used in dermal fillers, to temporarily increase their size and, consequently, the surface area of their ski suits. A 2023 study in Frontiers in Sports and Active Living demonstrated that even a small increase in suit size can significantly enhance performance, increasing lift and decreasing drag. While potentially advantageous, this practice carries significant health risks, as evidenced by cases of severe infections and organ failure resulting from penile filler injections.
That’s all for today. Tune in on Wednesday, when we’ll explore how researchers are leveraging AI to enhance home safety for individuals with Alzheimer’s and dementia. Science Quickly is produced by me, Kendra Pierre-Louis, along with Fonda Mwangi, Sushmita Pathak, and Jeff DelViscio. This episode was edited by Alex Sugiura. Shayna Posses and Aaron Shattuck fact-check our show. Our theme music was composed by Dominic Smith. Subscribe to Scientific American for more up-to-date and in-depth science news. For Scientific American, this is Kendra Pierre-Louis. Have a great week!
