Quantcast

100 Days: The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

By Eric Pooley

President Trump said recently that the tradition of rating a new president's first 100 days is "ridiculous." The White House then created a web page devoted to rating his first 100 days.

It's further proof, if anyone needed it, that the defining feature of this president's first 100 days is noise. Every day brings some piercing new alarm, making it hard to separate the momentarily disturbing from the truly damaging. But this is essential—especially for the environment.

While the president has flip-flopped on some signature issues, he's been totally consistent about dismantling protections for public health, clean air and clean water. So let's take a closer look at what he's done so far, and what it will mean for our health and our world.

Here are the four worst actions Trump took during his first 100 days—and one that's very good:

1. Hired Scott Pruitt

Trump's choice of leader for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) built his career by attacking the agency and its clean air and water rules.

Pruitt is beginning to staff the EPA with Beltway insiders who have made their living lobbying for weaker pollution rules on behalf of industry.

For example, it has been widely reported that Andrew Wheeler may be named as Pruitt's top deputy. Wheeler is now a lobbyist for Murray Energy, a coal mining conglomerate that is demanding an end to the rule that limits mercury pollution.

In fact, a recent analysis by Columbia University Law School showed that more than one quarter of the administration's appointees so far to environmental, energy and natural resource agencies have close ties to the fossil fuel industry. The likely result: Thousands of decisions over the next four years made by those more interested in protecting polluters than public health.

That will leave a toxic legacy of more disease and premature death.

2. Undermined Chemical Safety

Last year, a bipartisan Congress overwhelmingly passed the Lautenberg Act, a new chemical safety law that, after four decades of a broken system that flooded our stores and homes with dangerous or untested chemicals, finally constructed a strong chemical safety net.

But now the EPA has to finish writing the rules to implement it. For that, Pruitt has chosen Nancy Beck, an insider straight from the main chemical industry trade association who even within the last few weeks lobbied the agency on these very rules.

If those new rules give industry everything it wants, we'll have blown a historic chance to restore public trust and market confidence in the products consumers buy for household use. Our health would continue to be at risk—and undoing the damage would take years.

3. Asked to Slash the Federal Budget

The administration's budget proposal would cut the EPA by almost a third—more than any other agency—even though its budget is tiny to begin with.

Out of every $10 the federal government spends, only two cents go to the EPA. These cuts aren't being done to save money. They're part of an ideological crusade the public doesn't support.

If the EPA budget is cut this way, the loss of experts and institutional knowledge will reverberate for years. Detailed plans obtained by the Washington Post show that Trump and Pruitt want to cut a quarter of the workforce and abolish 56 programs with impacts from the Chesapeake Bay to Puget Sound.

Together, this will lead to more asthma attacks, more health problems for the elderly and a more dangerous future.

4. Moved to Roll Back Protections from Dirty Energy

Pruitt is now trying to gut many of the same the rules and safeguards he sued to stop as Oklahoma's attorney general. They limit the amount of arsenic and acid gases power plants can emit, reduce smog that causes respiratory problems and cut carbon pollution that causes climate change.

He has signaled hostility to the Mercury and Air Toxics Rule, despite the fact that virtually all power plants are already in compliance. The EPA chief and Trump have also taken aim at the Clean Power Plan, America's first limits on carbon pollution from power plants, without any strategy to replace it.

The energy market is moving toward cleaner energy, but slowing that process means losing clean tech jobs to other countries and a bigger cleanup for our children's generation.

5. Fueled Environmental Activism

This is the positive legacy of the Trump administration: Americans who used to take clean air and water for granted are waking up to the danger.

Membership in environmental groups is skyrocketing—the biggest question we get these days is, "What can I do?" as women and men from all walks of life are reclaiming environmentalism as a mainstream American value.

Thousands will take to the streets in Washington and other cities on Saturday for the People's Climate March. Just as a blossoming environmental awareness in the early 1970s led to some of the bedrock laws we rely on today, I believe the great awakening of 2017 will echo for years to come.

If we work together and make our voices heard, we can limit the worst of the damage Trump intends to inflict.

Eric Pooley is a senior vice president at Environmental Defense Fund and author of The Climate War.

Keep reading... Show less

Rick Perry: Trump Might Seize States' Renewable Energy Goals

By Dave Anderson

Rick Perry said Tuesday that the Trump administration is having "very classified" conversations about preempting state and local support for renewable energy under the pretense of national security.

Perry's remarks came during an on-stage interview at the 2017 Bloomberg New Energy Finance Summit.

As Bloomberg reported:

During an on-stage interview, Perry was asked if the administration would interfere with state policies requiring utilities to get power from renewable sources. Such a move would potentially destroy efforts by California, New York and other states to fight climate change by encouraging the growth of clean power.

Perry didn't rule it out, saying the reliability of the grid was a matter of national security.

"That's a conversation that will occur over the next few years," Perry said. "There may be issues that are so important that the federal government can intervene."

And according to Time's Justin Worland:

During a question and answer period, Perry also suggested that increased reliance on renewable energy sources like wind and solar might make the grid unreliable given they only work when the sun is shining and the wind is blowing, creating national security concerns. The Trump administration might try to preempt state and local governments that use policy to encourage clean energy to address those concerns, Perry said.

"There's a discussion, some of it very classified that will be occurring as we go further," Perry said. "The conversation needs to happen so the local governors and legislators, mayors and city council understand what's at stake here in making sure that our energy security is substantial."

Saqib Rahim of E&E News provided a slightly different quote from Perry:

"There's a conversation, there's a discussion, some of it obviously very classified, that will be occurring as we go forward, to make sure that we have the decisions made by Congress, in a lot of these cases, to protect the security interests of America," he said at BNEF's The Future of Energy Summit, "and that states and local entities do in fact get preempted with some of those decisions."

Perry's remarks re-sparked earlier concerns that the Trump administration could seek to preempt renewable energy standard policies that are now in place in 29 states, as well as renewable energy goals adopted by another nine states. The growing number of local communities that have committed to transitioning to 100 percent renewable energy could also come under fire from the Trump administration.

Renewable Energy Is Reliable and Makes America Safer—Just Ask the Department of Energy

Rick Perry is also facing scrutiny for ordering a study examining "electricity markets and reliability" that was tasked to his Chief of Staff Brian McCormack, who previously played a central role in attacks against rooftop solar for the Edison Electric Institute. Also named to lead work on the study is political appointee Travis Fisher. Fisher previously worked for the Institute for Energy Research (IER) and American Energy Alliance (AEA), which have received ample funding from the Koch brothers and coal industry. IER and AEA have long sought to undermine renewable energy standards in states like North Carolina, a national leader in solar energy.

Christian Roselund of PV Magazine responded to Perry's study order by pointing out that the National Renewable Energy Laboratory (NREL)—one of the Dept. of Energy's 17 National Laboratories—has already written studies that show we can rely on renewable energy to provide much more of our electricity than it does today. In fact, one 2012 NREL study found that we could get 80 percent of our electricity from renewable sources by 2050 using existing technologies. Other studies by states and grid operators confirm that renewable energy is reliable.

Another NREL study documented the significant health and environmental benefits generated by the state renewable energy standards that the Trump administration could try to preempt. In short, these policies make Americans safer by reducing harmful pollution emitted when we burn fossil fuels—especially coal—to produce electricity.

Other reports by clean energy experts have documented the economic security benefits of these state renewable energy standards, which have supported the growth of jobs in the booming solar and wind power industries.

Real world experience also shows that renewable energy is working just fine. Texas, the state where Rick Perry was governor, actually leads the nation in wind energy generation. In fact, nearly a quarter of the electricity generated in Texas during the first quarter of 2017 came from wind.

Ask the Department of Defense, Too

The Dept. of Defense does not appear to share the Trump administration's concerns about renewable energy. In fact, the military has made significant investments in renewable energy in order to enhance national security—an investment that continues with Trump in the White House. The U.S. Navy just recently refuted misleading claims that a new wind farm could interfere with a radar system made by some Republican lawmakers in North Carolina who wrote a letter to the Trump administration.

Climate Change Is a Real Threat to Energy and National Security

In 2015, the Dept. of Energy released a report that documented the threat climate change poses to energy security—and by extension national security—in every region of the U.S.

The Dept. of Defense has also documented the national security risks posed by climate change— risks James Mattis acknowledged during his confirmation as Trump's Secretary of Defense.

Trump's efforts to rollback limits on carbon dioxide pollution from power plants and his embrace of the so-called "clean coal" put the nation's energy and national security at further risk from climate change. Preempting state and local support for renewables would only increase those risks.

Rick Perry Could Support Renewable Energy by Working for a Smart Grid

Greentech Media reported that Perry made only "sparse" mention of renewable energy at the Bloomberg New Energy Finance Summit, but did say he wants to "help renewable energy make its way to the grid … "

Preempting local and state support for renewable energy would only ensure that less renewable energy makes its way to the grid. Perry could instead take positive steps to support integration of renewable energy by working to build a smart grid, the topic of a Dept. of Energy website. He could also support the energy storage revolution that is now underway, thanks in part to earlier investments by the Dept. of Energy.

Unfortunately, the Trump administration's energy policy seems to more squarely align with fossil fuel and utility interests who seek to undermine state and local support for renewable energy.

The Trump Team Is Full of Opponents of State and Local Support for Renewable Energy

Travis Fisher is not the only political pick by the Trump administration that comes with a history of attacking state and local policies that have fueled the growth of renewable energy to benefit funders in the fossil fuel or utility industry.

Trump tapped Thomas Pyle, also of the Institute for Energy Research (IER) and American Energy Alliance (AEA), to run his Dept. of Energy transition team. IER and AEA have targeted state renewable energy standard policies with misleading attacks for years. During the 2016 election, Trump responded to an AEA questionnaire with pledges to "review" key U.S. clean energy and climate change policies, including the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Power Plan and science-based endangerment finding for greenhouse gas emissions. Trump has already fulfilled part of that pledge by beginning the process of rolling back the Clean Power Plan.

Trump similarly chose climate denier Myron Ebell of the Competitive Enterprise Institute to lead his Environmental Protection Agency transition team. Like Fisher and Pyle, Ebell has attacked renewable energy standards in states like Ohio. Greentech Media recently took a rather revealing look at the backgrounds of some other members of Trump's energy beachhead team.

No Uncertainty About State and Local Support for Renewable Energy

At this point, it remains unclear how exactly the Trump administration would use the pretense of reliability concerns to preempt state and local support for renewable energy. If it does seek to preempt state and local control, it will certainly face significant opposition from states and local communities—including those led by Republicans—that are already leading the way on renewable energy.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored

The Whole World Is Watching as Trump Trashes U.S. Climate Policy

Amid questions over whether the executive order would end U.S. involvement in the Paris agreement—and with no firm indication from the White House about staying in the agreement—top European Union climate official Miguel Arias Cañete expressed "regret" over Trump's policies Tuesday, promising that the European Union "will stand by Paris, we will defend Paris and we will implement Paris."

China showed it would continue to cement its global leadership on climate, as officials reaffirmed to press the country was still committed to the Paris agreement and adding "China's resolve, aims and policy moves in dealing with climate change will not change."

Former United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change leader Christiana Figueres expressed confidence in the agreement's durability, telling Fusion in an interview that the economic benefits of a global clean energy transition make the agreement "unstoppable."

"It's important to understand that no single country, no matter how large or small, can cancel the Paris Climate Agreement," explained Figueres. "The Paris Agreement is a multilateral agreement that has gone into force, and any country has the right to exit the agreement, or in fact to exit the Convention, but that doesn't mean that the multilateral structure is actually canceled."

For a deeper dive:

EU: Washington Post, AP, WSJ, The Guardian China: New York Times, Reuters

Figueres: PRI, Fusion Commentary: The Guardian, Damian Carrington analysis

For more climate change and clean energy news, you can follow Climate Nexus on Twitter and Facebook, and sign up for daily Hot News.

Keep reading... Show less

Trump Plans to Aggressively Expand Offshore Drilling in Protected Areas

President Trump plans to sign an executive order today intended to aggressively expand drilling in protected waters off the Atlantic and Arctic oceans.

The new EO will direct U.S. Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke to review the current offshore drilling plans, which limits most drilling to parts of the Gulf of Mexico and Alaska's Cook Inlet, and reexamine opening parts of the Atlantic and Arctic oceans to drilling. The EO will also roll back President Obama's permanent ban on drilling in the Arctic, issued in the last full month of his presidency. Zinke cautioned reporters that implementation of the EO will be "a multi-year effort," and several groups have pledged lawsuits to further slow down the process.

"Interior Sec. Ryan Zinke is dead wrong," said Greenpeace USA senior climate and energy campaigner Diana Best.

"Renewable energy already has us on the right track to energy independence, and opening new areas to offshore oil and gas drilling will lock us into decades of harmful pollution, devastating spills like the Deepwater Horizon tragedy and a fossil fuel economy with no future. Scientific consensus is that the vast majority of known fossil fuel reserves—including the oil and gas off U.S. coasts—must remain undeveloped if we are to avoid the worst effects of climate change."

Best added that Trump's latest executive order does not have popular support, and instead caters to "Trump's inner circle of desperate fossil fuel executives."

"Holing up at Mar-a-lago may protect Trump from an oil spill," she said, "but it will not protect him and his cabinet of one percenters from the millions of people in this country—from California to North Carolina—who will resist his disastrous policies."

Waterkeeper Alliance Executive Director Marc Yaggi agrees. "This attempt to greatly expand offshore drilling into the Arctic and Atlantic is a blatant prioritization of fossil fuel profits over the health of our climate and coastal communities," he said. "President Trump is ignoring the cries of citizens who have said offshore drilling poses too great a threat to their economies and ways of life."

For a deeper dive:

New York Times, AP, Axios, Politico, NPR, LA Times, Bloomberg, USA Today, The Hill, ThinkProgress

For more climate change and clean energy news, you can follow Climate Nexus on Twitter and Facebook, and sign up for daily Hot News.

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored
Politics

Bernie Sanders: 'This Is Exactly What We Mean When We Talk About Oligarchy'

Despite the numerous controversies and vocal opposition swirling around President Donald Trump's pick to head the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Senators voted 52 to 46, largely along party lines, in February to confirm Oklahoma Republican Scott Pruitt as EPA administrator.

It now appears that Koch Industries—the oil and gas conglomerate owned by billionaire brothers Charles and David Koch—directly lobbied Congress to confirm Pruitt and spent millions to influence anti-environmental initiatives, a disclosure report shows.

As The Intercept reported:

"The firm's latest disclosure form reports that its in-house corporate lobbying team spent $3.1 million to influence lawmakers over the first three months of the year on a variety of issues affecting its bottom line, including the EPA's Clean Power Rule on carbon emissions, carbon pricing, the Clean Air Act and 'nominations for various positions at the Department of Energy.'"

"This is exactly what we mean when we talk about oligarchy. Multi-billionaires and corporations should not have the power to pick and choose who is in charge of our federal agencies," Vermont Sen. Bernie Sanders said in response to The Intercept's report. "But that is exactly what happened—Koch Industries spent millions on lobbying Congress to confirm Scott Pruitt, our head of the Environmental Protection Agency who doesn't believe in environmental protection."

Koch Industries has contributed $38.5 million to federal candidates over the last 25 years and spent another $117 million since 1998 on lobbying. DeSmog reported in February that the company's deep pockets are contributing campaign funds to four GOP representatives who have introduced legislation to completely abolish the EPA.

Sanders, who grilled Pruitt during the confirmation hearings, has been outspoken in his criticism of Pruitt as well as the Trump administration's generally dismissive attitude towards climate change.

"It's clear that Trump doesn't represent working families. His agenda benefits the Koch brothers and their billionaire [friends]. Our job is to stand together to defeat the drift toward oligarchy and create a vibrant democracy—not one controlled by corporate interests," Sanders said.

Pruitt has reported ties to the fossil fuel industry and he repeatedly sued the EPA when he was Oklahoma Attorney General. In 2014, he was caught sending letters on state government letterheads to President Obama and federal agency heads asserting that the EPA was overestimating the air pollution from drilling for natural gas in Oklahoma. As it turns out, the letter was written by lawyers for one of the state's largest oil and gas companies, Devon Energy.

Following Trump's executive order, Pruitt plans to kill the Clean Power Plan, an Obama-era regulation designed to reduce carbon pollution from power plants. Pruitt also challenged the plan when he was Oklahoma AG.

Pruitt said in March that he does not believe carbon dioxide is a primary contributor to climate change.

The Intercept also detailed how Pruitt's nomination as EPA head was strongly backed by industry groups:

"The American Energy Alliance, an advocacy group founded by former Koch Industries lobbyist Tom Pyle, issued a letter in support of Pruitt along with other Koch-backed conservative nonprofits. America Rising Squared, a political research outfit that has harassed environmental activists, formed a special website—now deleted—to respond to criticism of Pruitt's record."

Keep reading... Show less
Cedar Mesa Valley of the Gods in the Bears Ears National Monument in southeastern Utah. Bob Wick, BLM

Trump Signs Executive Order Targeting National Monuments, Could Open Up Lands for Oil and Gas Development

President Trump signed an executive order Wednesday ordering a review of the Antiquities Act and national monuments on more than 100,000 acres.

The review enables the Department of Interior to examine whether any of the monument designations have led to a "loss of jobs, reduced wages and reduced public access."

"The Antiquities Act does not give the federal government unlimited power to lock up millions of acres of land and water," President Donald Trump said during a brief ceremony today flanked by Vice President Mike Pence and Sec. of the Interior Ryan Zinke. He added that it was "time to end this abusive practice."

The 1.35-million acre Bears Ears National Monument in Utah is one of the first targets for review. The monument was created by President Obama last year and has sparked major controversy between Republican lawmakers and conservationists. Utah Gov. Gary Herbert and Utah's congressional delegation led by Congressmen Rob Bishop and Jason Chaffetz and Senators Orrin Hatch and Mike Lee have launched a campaign to abolish national monument. More than 270 million acres of American land and waters are potentially at risk—an area two and a half times the size of California.

GOP lawmakers have accused President Obama, who designated more monuments than any other president, of abusing the Antiquities Act to protect land from fossil fuel development.

"By potentially rolling back safeguards for lands and waters that are currently protected from destructive development for generations to come, Trump is carving up this beautiful country into as many corporate giveaways for the oil and gas industry as possible," said Diana Best of Greenpeace USA. "People in this country who cannot afford the membership fee at Mar-a-Lago want safe water they can drink and public lands for their communities to enjoy."

National monument designations have protected some of the most iconic places in the country. Dozens of the nation's most treasured national parks were first protected as monuments, including Grand Teton, Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Acadia and Olympic national parks, explained the Center for Biological Diversity.

Rhea Suh, president of the Natural Resources Defense Council, emphasized that the NRDC will fight the review, and said the president is not authorized to reverse monument designations.

"These public lands belong to all of us," she said. "The U.S. holds them in trust for the benefit of this and future generations. These monuments have been deemed worthy of permanent conservation because of their unique resources and wildlife, ecological importance, and vulnerability to encroachment and destruction. President Trump and Secretary Zinke should not strip away their protection and subject them to industrial exploitation by polluters or other corporate interests."

The Center for Biological Diversity noted that more than 50 national monuments are at risk, including vast marine areas in the Pacific and Caribbean. Congress gave the president the authority to designate national monuments on federally owned land under the Antiquities Act of 1906, which was signed into law by President Teddy Roosevelt, for the express purpose of protecting important objects of historic and scientific importance.

"This is a frightening step toward dismantling the protection of some of America's most important and iconic places: our national parks and monuments," said Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity. "Trump's tapping into the right-wing, anti-public-lands zealotry that will take us down a very dangerous path—a place where Americans no longer have control over public lands and corporations are left to mine, frack, clear-cut and bulldoze them into oblivion. It starts with Bears Ears and Grand Staircase and only gets worse from there."

National monuments are cherished by Americans for their natural beauty and cultural significance.

"There is no need for a review to demonstrate what families across the country already know first-hand—national monuments provide tangible health, natural, and economic benefits," said Michael Brune, Sierra Club executive director. "Protected outdoor spaces drive the outdoor recreation economy which supports 7.6 million jobs and generates $887 billion in consumer spending each year. National monuments and public lands are vital both for the history they preserve and the future they offer.

"Contrary to the Trump administration's thinly veiled hopes," he added, "this review will reveal what studies, surveys and polls have consistently found across the country—a deep, widespread appreciation for our parks, monuments and other public lands, and a popular belief that they should continue to exist."

As thousands of people across the country and in Washington, DC are expected to join the People's Climate March on Saturday, indigenous leaders and climate activists will, as 350.org Executive Director May Boeve points out, "now have to defend our parks and monuments from Big Oil as well."

Tom Goldtooth, executive director of the Indigenous Environmental Network, put it this way. "This is another Trump action that is another act of aggression against the inherent sovereign rights of our Native Nations to protect the traditional cultural areas and sacred places of American Indian and Alaska Native people," he said.

"There are many areas in this country, outside of our reserved lands that are of vital importance to our Indigenous peoples' identity and rich cultural and spiritual history. The 1906 Antiquities Act cannot be stripped on its important historical mandates to designate national monuments to protect areas that have cultural, historical and environmental significance. The act is paramount to all the tribes in this country; for our cultural preservation now and into the future. The frontline Indigenous communities in our network see Trump's actions as a way to open up fossil fuel and extractive mineral development within these national monuments designated under the 1906 Antiquities Act. Trump's action must be stopped."

Companies are also outraged at Trump's latest executive order. "Less than 24 hours after joining with our industry to celebrate the economic power of outdoor recreation, in a hypocritical move, the Trump administration took unprecedented steps that could result in the removal of protections for treasured public lands," Patagonia CEO Rose Marcario said.

"We take this as a sign that Trump and his team prefer to cater to fossil fuel interests and state land grabs for unsustainable development, rather than preserve a vital part of our nation's heritage for future generations by protecting federal lands owned by every citizen."

Keep reading... Show less
Sponsored

Trump to Launch Unprecedented Attack on National Monuments

President Trump is poised to threaten more than 1 billion acres of national monument protection in a devastating and unprecedented attack on America's public lands and oceans.

Trump is expected to issue an executive order April 26 calling for a review of every national monument that's been protected by presidential proclamation since 1996. His goal is to turn these natural and cultural wonders over to special interests, including mining and logging industries. Trump reportedly has the stunning Bears Ears and Grand Staircase-Escalante national monuments in Utah at the top of his hit list.

"This is a frightening step toward dismantling the protection of some of America's most important and iconic places: our national parks and monuments," said Kierán Suckling, executive director of the Center for Biological Diversity. "Trump's tapping into the right-wing, anti-public-lands zealotry that will take us down a very dangerous path—a place where Americans no longer have control over public lands and corporations are left to mine, frack, clear-cut and bulldoze them into oblivion. It starts with Bears Ears and Grand Staircase and only gets worse from there."

More than 50 national monuments are at risk, including vast marine areas in the Pacific and Caribbean. Congress gave the president the authority to designate national monuments on federally owned land under the Antiquities Act of 1906 for the express purpose of protecting important objects of historic and scientific importance.

"President Trump is clearly doing the bidding of the Utah congressional delegation, who are without question the most aggressive federal lawmakers seeking to seize, dismantle and privatize America's public lands," Suckling added.

National monument designations have protected some of the most iconic places in the country. Dozens of the nation's most treasured national parks were first protected as monuments, including Grand Teton, Grand Canyon, Bryce, Zion, Acadia and Olympic national parks.

"With this review, Trump is declaring war on America's public lands," Suckling said. "The president is satiating the greed of industry and blatantly dismissing the wishes of the vast majority of Americans, who overwhelmingly want to see these areas protected for future generations."

The monuments under attack are cherished by Americans for their natural beauty as well as their huge cultural significance.

Congress gave the president authority to designate national monuments on federally owned land under the Antiquities Act of 1906 to protect significant natural, cultural or scientific features. No president has ever attempted to withdraw a monument named by a predecessor.

Keep reading... Show less

Play-by-Play: Trump's First 100 Days

Since taking office, President Trump and the Republican-controlled Congress have unleashed the worst-ever assault on our right to breathe clean air, drink safe water and enjoy healthy lands, moving to undo the historic progress of recent years to address climate change.

Rolling back a half century of bipartisan advances in protecting our health and our environment is not a plan that puts America first. It's a brazen payoff that puts polluters first and the rest of us at risk.

As we approach the 100-day mark, here are the highlights or lowlights, of what Trump and the GOP Congress have accomplished so far―and what they have not.

Spoiler alert: Much of Trump's orders cannot be pushed through simply by fiat; there's often an extensive administrative process, public engagement period and rulemaking required, all of which takes months, even years, to complete. Much can also be slowed, stopped and reversed, as illustrated through some key legal challenges that the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC) and our allies have already taken to thwart this dangerous agenda.

Trump's Assaults

April 19: EPA asks court to stop work on a power plant pollution case.

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is preparing to ask a federal court to delay an oral argument challenging federal standards limiting mercury, lead and other toxic air pollution, although the power sector has largely complied with the rule advanced in 2012. John Walke, director of NRDC's Clean Air Project, said, "This disgraceful move is the first step toward weakening or reversing health standards limiting toxic air pollution from the nation's power plants."

April 13: EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt calls for exiting international climate agreement.

Pruitt incorrectly calls the landmark Paris accord, which the U.S. helped broker, a "bad deal" and falsely asserts that China and India won't do anything to curb climate change until 2030. In fact, both countries are acting now to curb dangerous carbon pollution and dramatically expand renewable power from the wind and sun. Trump and Pruitt would damage the air Americans breathe, the water we drink and the planet we inhabit, just to let polluters get away scot-free, said Han Chen, NRDC's international climate advocate, who analyzed China's and India's climate commitments.

April 7: Pruitt moves to kill smog protections.

As Oklahoma attorney general, Pruitt sided with polluters challenging federal limits on ozone pollution. Now, at the EPA, Pruitt has backed away from defending the standards for ground-level ozone—a byproduct of fossil fuel pollution that produces smog and is linked to respiratory and heart ailments. The EPA asked a federal court to delay oral arguments in the lawsuit, saying it needs time to "fully review" the rule. "President Trump is aiding baseless litigation mounted by Scott Pruitt before he was put in charge of EPA over the consensus of doctors and scientists," NRDC's Walke said.

March 30: EPA skirts banning dangerous pesticide.

Pruitt gave a green light to chlorpyrifos, a pesticide sprayed on crops including apples, almonds, broccoli, strawberries and citrus fruits, giving new meaning to the notion of the poisoned apple in the Garden of Eden. The pesticide is linked to learning disabilities in children. Pruitt rejected his agency's own analysis in declining to ban chlorpyrifos.

March 28: Trump signs Climate Destruction Order.

The most egregious step in Trump's first 100 days of his presidency is the signing of a "climate destruction plan" couched in a pro-pollution "energy independence" order.

The far-reaching order:

• Calls for "review" of the Clean Power Plan, the landmark Obama administration clean air standards. These would clean up existing dirty plants, reduce climate change, save thousands of lives and prevent hundreds of thousands of respiratory ailments and asthma attacks. But presidents don't get to reverse federal rules by fiat; they have to go through a public process and demonstrate that their actions are consistent with law and science. Trump has a long, hard road ahead of him in his effort to reverse the Clean Power Plan and NRDC and its allies will fight for it every step of the way. More here.

• Calls for "review" of new plant carbon pollution standards. In contrast to the Clean Power Plan, the rules for new power plants have not been stayed by the courts. So for this rule, EPA Administrator Pruitt cannot give his industry allies relief except by going through the rulemaking process. That's why Pruitt has asked the federal courts to stop work on a case addressing this rule, an inappropriate stalling tactic aimed at scrapping the rule by stealth, said NRDC's David Doniger, head of the Climate & Clean Air program.

• Eliminates estimating costs of climate change. The order withdraws documents that lay out the social cost of carbon estimate and disbands the interagency working group that calculated it. Why? Because it reveals something polluters don't want widely known—carbon pollution imposes real costs on Americans' health and the economy.

• Ends a moratorium on new coal mining on public lands. This derails the effort to promote development of clean energy and to overhaul a broken federal leasing program that's shortchanged taxpayers to the tune of more than $30 billion, according to Theo Spencer, a senior advocate at NRDC.

• Repeals protections against methane pollution. If Trump succeeds, the oil and gas industry will continue leaking hundreds of millions of dollars' worth of this potent climate change pollutant into the air every year, harming public health and our climate.

• Ends a methane pollution reporting requirement. This measure affects pollution from oil and gas wells on national wildlife refuges. Nixing the reporting requirement favors the fossil fuel industry, allowing toxic pollution that threatens human and wildlife health to continue, noted NRDC's Bobby McEnaney, senior deputy director of the Western Renewable Energy Project.

• Embraces fracking. It begins the process to repeal standards for hydraulic fracturing or fracking, on public lands and methane limits for new oil and gas fracking anywhere. This endangers public lands and neighboring communities, worsens climate change and shows "where Trump's loyalties lie—with polluters, not the people," said NRDC President Rhea Suh.

• Eliminates climate guidance. The White House Council on Environmental Quality had issued guidance to federal agencies on how they could analyze the climate impacts of their proposed actions before deciding on how to proceed. Trump wants to revoke guidance from this council. More here.

• Promises to bring back coal jobs. Trump signed the order surrounded by coal miners. But coal has been declining for years as natural gas has steadily replaced coal-fired power, renewable energy has boomed and machines have displaced miners, with jobs plunging from about 170,000 in 1985 to 50,000 today. Miners need help making the transition away from coal, not empty promises.

March 28: The administration stops work on Clean Power Plan.

Trump urged a federal court to stop work on the Clean Power Plan case. His intent is eminently clear: to keep the judiciary from ruling on the legality of the Clean Power Plan. A 10-judge panel heard the case six months ago and the argument didn't go well for critics, so Trump wants to head off a ruling, which could affirm that the climate plan is legal. NRDC's Doniger calls it a stealth plan to kill the Clean Power Plan.

March 24: Keystone XL resurrected from the dead.

Trump signed a cross-border permit approving construction of the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, which would imperil water, lands and the climate. Six days later, NRDC joined Friends of the Earth, Bold Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Northern Plains Resource Council and the Sierra Club in suing the administration for illegally granting the permit.

March 22: Republicans tout smog.

On Capitol Hill, congressional Republicans held a hearing to shine a spotlight on their bill to weaken health protections against ozone pollution. Critics call the measure the "Smoggy Skies Act." The GOP legislation would block ozone standards that the EPA updated under former president Obama; it would also delay updates on other pollutants, such as lead and carbon monoxide. Improving ozone standards, according to the EPA, can help avoid up to 660 premature deaths, 230,000 childhood asthma attacks and 160,000 days when kids miss school.

March 16: Trump to EPA experts: "You're fired."

Trump's proposed budget for 2018 calls for a 31 percent cut in EPA funding, the largest percentage cut of any agency. The stakes for public health are enormous. The budget would eliminate as many as 3,200 of the agency's 15,000 employees. Programs to be slashed include those for criminal enforcement, Energy Star certification, Superfund sites, air-quality monitoring, climate protection and cleanup of America's most iconic bodies of water, including the Great Lakes, Puget Sound and Chesapeake Bay. But Congress determines federal spending and already there's resistance, including from some Republicans, suggesting that Trump's budget for EPA is D.O.A.

March 16: Trump overlooks national parks.

Trump envisions a 12 percent cut to the U.S. Department of the Interior, which even its secretary, Ryan Zinke, thinks is too much. Sharon Buccino, head of NRDC's Land & Wildlife program, pointed out that our national parks are huge generators for the economy, with more than 300 million visitors last year, yet have a $12 billion backlog in maintenance. And instead of investing in conservation, funding cuts pave the way for dirty energy development.

March 15: Trump retracts decision to keep strong clean car standards.

The president moved to weaken carbon pollution standards for light-duty vehicles for model years 2022–2025. Mileage standards save consumers money at the gas pump, make Americans less dependent on oil, reduce carbon pollution and advance innovation. If the rollback succeeds, thousands of manufacturing jobs could be lost in Michigan alone, where nearly 70,000 workers are building clean vehicle components. The current standards helped auto companies move from bankruptcy to profitability and there is no reason they cannot be met, said NRDC President Suh.

March 14: Trump's EPA "reconsiders" chemical plant safety rule.

EPA granted a request by chemical manufacturers to sideline implementation of a rule developed over three years to improve emergency coordination and remove hazards. The rule came in response to a 2013 fertilizer plant explosion in Texas that killed 15 workers. That wasn't the only tragedy. There were 1,500 similar incidents from 2004 to 2013 that killed 58 people and injured 17,000.

March 2: EPA Administrator Pruitt caves in to polluters on methane pollution.

Pruitt signed a directive canceling a November 2016 information-gathering request that oil and gas operations report their emissions of methane, a potent climate pollutant. NRDC's Meleah Geertsma, an attorney in NRDC's Midwest program, called out Pruitt for dancing with the "fossil energy AGs," referring to Pruitt's now-infamous Oklahoma e-mails obtained by a court order.

Feb. 28: Trump supports water pollution.

The president signed an executive order directing the EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers to begin repealing the Clean Water Rule, a landmark measure many years in the making. Likewise, EPA Administrator Pruitt recently told Fox News that he plans to go "full speed ahead" to attack the rule. Their happy obedience to Trump insults all Americans―especially the 117 million of us who get drinking water drawn from streams that the rule would help protect from pollution, said NRDC water expert Jon Devine.

Feb. 24: Trump adds roadblocks to new standards.

He signed an anti-regulatory executive order directing each federal administrative agency and department to designate a "regulatory reform officer" and to establish a "regulatory reform task force," implementing the administration's plan to attack the process by which safety, health and environmental standards are set.

Feb. 17: Trump and Republicans make bribes easier.

They killed an SEC requirement that oil, gas and coal firms report gifts to foreign governments for developing natural resources on their lands.

Jan. 30: Trump signs measure getting rid of rules without justification.

He signed a two-for-one executive order, opposed by more than 130 groups representing small business, labor, good government, financial protection, community, health, environmental, civil rights and public interest advocates. "If implemented," they wrote in a letter to Trump, "its flawed reasoning and vague drafting would leave Americans more vulnerable to financial, safety, health and environmental hazards."

Jan. 24: Trump signs order requiring pipelines be made of U.S. steel.

Notably, just days before, Trump had repeated a false statement that the pipeline would be built with U.S. steel, notes Josh Axelrod, a policy analyst in NRDC's Canada Project. And soon after, the White House said the Keystone XL tar sands pipeline, for which the steel had already been purchased―including from non-U.S. sources―would be exempt.

Jan. 24: Trump signs orders paving way for quick approval of Keystone XL and Dakota Access pipelines.

He abruptly reversed a determination by former president Obama that those projects are not in the national interest and reignited the debate over pipelines carrying dirty fuel that threaten land, water and the climate. His order calls for the Army Corps of Engineers to "review and approve in an expedited manner" the projects, over vehement objections by landowners and indigenous people in their path. "It's appalling that Trump wants to throw open our borders and fragile lands to big polluters," said NRDC President Suh, who vowed to use every tool available to "help ensure that they are not built."

Jan. 24: Trump signs executive order short-circuiting public engagement.

This order, aimed at green-lighting big projects, cuts the national interest determination period for projects like the Keystone XL pipeline to just 60 days. This stifles public engagement and makes it all but impossible for the government to adequately study the merits and drawbacks of major infrastructure projects.

Congressional GOP Assaults

Since early January, the GOP-led Congress has voted 42 times against the environment, according to an analysis by the Center for American Progress. Key votes include:

Feb. 3: House backs increased methane pollution.

The House voted on a Congressional Review Act measure to do away with a Bureau of Land Management rule limiting the venting, flaring and leaking of methane from oil and gas operations on public lands. The rule aimed to reduce harmful methane emissions, prevent the waste of taxpayer dollars and curb a potent climate-change polluter. Congressional leaders "doing the bidding of oil and gas industry lobbyists are hell-bent to block these safeguards," NRDC's Doniger wrote in an analysis of the measure.

Feb. 1: Streams put at risk from coal waste.

At the behest of polluters, Congress used the Congressional Review Act to overturn the Obama-era Stream Protection Rule, safeguarding waterways from toxic coal mining waste. Appalachian Voices, an environmental group, estimates that coal companies have buried more than 2,000 miles of streams in the region by mountaintop-removal mining.

Jan. 11: House okays broad assault on federal regulations.

In approving the Regulatory Accountability Act, the House allowed well-financed special interests to interminably delay needed health and safety protections and undermined laws requiring that health standards be based on science, not cost. Thirteen national groups including NRDC voiced opposition in a letter to House members, saying the legislation would, if passed, "leave Americans unprotected, giving industry an opportunity to pollute, damage health and engage in financial disruption." The bill is pending before the Senate.

Jan. 5: House limits new standards.

It approved, the Regulations from the Executive in Need of Scrutiny (REINS) bill would make it harder for the executive branch to issue new health standards, such as air quality protections. "The public expects the government to be able to protect it from toxins in food, consumer products, air and water. The REINS Act would make that virtually impossible," a coalition of groups wrote in a letter to senators in March. The bill is pending before the Senate.

Jan. 4: House sweeps away public health safeguards.

By passing the so-called Midnight Rules Relief Act, Congress is moving to be able to eviscerate public health, environmental, safety, consumer and financial safeguards with little consideration, NRDC and allies wrote in a letter sent in March to senators. The bill is pending before the Senate.

Going to Court Against Trump's Anti-Environmental Agenda

NRDC and allies have fought back to try to stop the rollbacks, repeals and eliminations of safeguards sought by team Trump and their Capitol Hill allies. Highlights include:

April 5: Defending the Clean Power Plan.

NRDC, joined by Earthjustice, Environmental Defense Fund, Sierra Club and the Center for Biological Diversity, filed a response opposing Trump's request that the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington stop work on the Clean Power Plan case before the court. NRDC's Doniger likened Trump's move to trying to kill the landmark plan by stealth; he called on the court to finish its work and issue its ruling.

April 5: Protecting children.

NRDC and Pesticide Action Network filed a motion to enforce a previous court order and require the EPA to make a decision on a proposed ban on chlorpyrifos, a pesticide linked to learning disabilities in children. Earlier, on Jan. 17, more than 45 doctors, scientists, nurses and public health professionals sent a letter urging the EPA to cancel remaining agricultural uses of the dangerous neurotoxic pesticide. An EPA assessment in 2016 found that chlorpyrifos residues in foods can be 140 times higher than EPA's acceptable exposure limit.

April 3: Pushing for delayed energy efficiency standards.

Legal challenges were filed charging the Department of Energy with dragging its feet on six energy efficiency standards that could save Americans as much as $23 billion. Kit Kennedy, head of NRDC's Energy & Transportation program, labeled the delay illegal and warned it was hurting families and businesses.

March 30: Stopping Keystone XL pipeline—again.

NRDC joined Friends of the Earth, Bold Alliance, Center for Biological Diversity, Northern Plains Resource Council and the Sierra Club in suing the administration for illegally granting a construction permit for the tar sands pipeline. If ever built, Keystone XL could carry up to 830,000 barrels of tar sands oil through the U.S., imperiling our water, land and climate.

March 21: Challenging EPA's botched weed-killer review.

Another dangerous chemical hit the spotlight when NRDC filed a petition for review in federal court of the EPA's illegal approval of Enlist Duo, a weed killer that poses a risk to human health and monarch butterflies.

March 15: Protecting clean water.

NRDC and the National Wildlife Federation opposed the Trump administration's effort to delay litigation over the Clean Water Rule and thus delay the rule's implementation indefinitely while the White House moves to kill it. "Rolling back the rule's safeguards endangers critical bodies of water―including the streams that feed the drinking water supplies of more than 117 million Americans," said NRDC's Devine.

Feb. 8: Fighting senseless rollbacks of safeguards.

NRDC filed suit seeking to block Trump's two-for-one order. NRDC President Suh likened the executive order to a doctor declaring that we can't find a cure for cancer unless we abandon vaccines for polio and smallpox. "New efforts to stop pollution don't automatically make old ones unnecessary. When you make policy by tweet, it yields irrational rules. This order imposes a false choice between clean air, clean water, safe food and other environmental safeguards," she said.

Feb. 1: Opposing EPA's rollback of mercury safeguards.

NRDC sued the agency for illegally rescinding, on Jan. 20, safeguards that would protect the public from tons of mercury discharges each year. Mercury, which can disrupt brain function and nervous system development, is especially harmful to pregnant women, babies and young children. "EPA's withdrawal of the mercury rule is not just illegal, but senseless. The rule imposes minimal burden, drew widespread praise from dental providers and benefits public health and the environment," said Aaron Colangelo, litigation director at NRDC.

NRDC President Suh recently penned a blog post, "100 Days of Harm." In it she addressed the first days of Trump's presidency and the Republican-led congressional assault on health and environment, discussed how out of step with public opinion they are and ended with a call to arms:

"A hundred days into Trump's presidency, we've already seen more than enough. It's time to gather as one and speak out against his senseless campaign to turn back the clock on 50 years of environmental gains and stanch the promise of more progress to come ... Let's put Donald Trump on notice. Let's show him what we believe. We won't back down from this challenge. We won't back down from this fight. We'll defend our health and environment. We'll hold fast to the values we share. We'll stand up for our children's future and their right to a livable world."

Keep reading... Show less

mail-copy

Get EcoWatch in your inbox