EPA moves to undo key climate rule; California vows to fight back

The Environmental Protection Agency took a major step toward backing out of the business of fighting climate change on Tuesday, a move that California leaders vowed to push back on.

The federal agency, after months of speculation, announced it was seeking to undo the scientific finding that authorizes greenhouse gas regulation. The “endangerment finding,” which asserts that greenhouse gases are harming humans and must be regulated, has helped spawn several federal policies that limit planet-warming pollution from vehicles, power plants and more.

Without the finding, these regulations could be without legal merit and subject to weakening or removal. EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, in announcing the agency’s plans at an auto dealership in Indiana, called specifically for eliminating emissions standards for cars and trucks.

California, as a champion for climate causes, has many state-level carbon pollution programs that wouldn’t be directly affected by repeal of the federal endangerment finding. Still, state leaders, alongside environmental groups across the nation, blasted the EPA’s announcement as another blow to the warming planet.

“On a global level, this is incredibly impactful and takes us backwards,” Yana Garcia, head of the California Environmental Protection Agency, told the Chronicle.

Critics of the EPA point to the many disasters that have been caused or exacerbated by anthropogenic warming, from the recent flooding in Texas to the devastating fires earlier this year in Los Angeles. They insist regulating heat-trapping gases is a national imperative.

California and other forward-thinking states, Garcia said, were working together to maintain and strengthen local and regional policies that target greenhouse gas emissions absent the federal government.

“The power that will come from ongoing coalitions will be critically important,” Garcia said.

Gov. Gavin Newsom responded to Tuesday’s EPA announcement by issuing a statement for the U.S. Climate Alliance, a collaboration of governors pushing for climate action.

“Americans deserve the truth from their federal government about the climate crisis,” the statement said. “No amount of burying research or firing scientists will change the facts: Greenhouse gas pollution causes climate change and endangers our health and welfare — period.”

The Trump administration, just seven months into office, has questioned the reality of climate change and pursued an agenda of broadly undoing regulations that raise costs for businesses and consumers. On Tuesday, Zeldin singled out the auto industry and car buyers as unfairly bearing the brunt.

In the EPA’s proposal to rescind the endangerment finding, published in the Federal Register, the agency argues that it never had the power to declare that greenhouse gases were harmful.

The EPA has begun accepting public comment on its proposal, after which time it’s expected to officially revoke the finding. Legal challenges are certain to follow.

The endangerment finding was published in 2009, two years after the Supreme Court ruled that the EPA has the power to regulate carbon dioxide, methane and other greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act.

Meanwhile, California, at the state-level, has regulated carbon pollution through such programs as cap and trade, which limits greenhouse gas emissions from industrial sources, and vehicle emissions standards, covering cars and trucks.

Congress recently revoked the state’s authority to move forward with an ambitious auto emissions policy that would have phased out gasoline-fueled vehicles by 2035 — the state is fighting to save the policy in court. California’s earlier vehicle emission standards remain in effect.

While environmental groups were overwhelmingly critical of the EPA’s announcement Tuesday, some who work on climate issues say there may be a silver lining.

Should the federal government stop regulating greenhouse gases, California and other states could choose to do it themselves, and perhaps do it more effectively, something they haven’t been allowed to do because of existing federal regulation. Of course, not all states would participate.

“One of my colleagues said they should be careful of what they wish for,” said Mary Nichols, distinguished counsel for UCLA’s Emmett Institute on Climate Change and Environment and former chair of the California Air Resources Board. “This leaves California much less subject to challenge if we say we want to regulate carbon emissions. They can’t preempt us from doing that.”