Feed aggregator

Investigation shows ageing assets and lack of funding could mean entire towns and villages vulnerable to flooding

Lives may be at risk if ministers proceed with cuts to England’s languishing canal network, experts have said.

The climate crisis and a lack of funding means ageing assets could flood entire towns and villages, an investigation for the parliamentary magazine the House has found.

Continue reading...

Labour has allowed climate action to become synonymous with hardship. Farage’s Reform is exploiting that – but we offer real solutions

• Carla Denyer is co-leader of the Green party of England and Wales and MP for Bristol Central

When I announced recently that I won’t be standing in this summer’s elections for the Green party’s leadership, many people wanted to know why. My answer is that I’ve always been guided by the question: “How can I make the biggest positive impact?”. I’m so proud of what Adrian Ramsay and I have accomplished over the past three and a half years: taking our party from one MP to four, from 450 councillors to more than 850, and growing and diversifying our membership. Having achieved what I set out to do, I’ve decided that for the next few years, I’ll pour all my skills, passion and energy into being the best MP I can be for my constituents in Bristol Central, using my seat in parliament to fight for the changes this country needs.

Since becoming an MP in July last year, I have found my ikigai – a Japanese concept describing the intersection of work that you love, you’re good at, and is what the world needs. There’s plenty I don’t love about how parliament works, but I feel incredibly motivated to be a voice asking “why can’t it be better?”, and a pair of hands working with others to try to build a better country. I joined the Green party because I wanted to change the country for the better, and I believed the best way to do that was by getting more Greens elected. In 2015 I was persuaded to stand for election myself – first as a councillor, then as an MP and then, at the insistence of friends and party colleagues, as co-leader of the Greens in 2021.

Carla Denyer is co-leader of the Green party of England and Wales and MP for Bristol Central

Continue reading...

Anne Ruston says policy positions should be thrashed out in Liberal and National party rooms rather than enshrined in Coalition agreements

• Full federal election results: live Australian Senate seat count
• See our full coverage of the Australian election
• Get our breaking news email, free app or daily news podcast

The divisions within the Liberals on climate and energy policy are “no secret”, senior frontbencher Anne Ruston has admitted, as the party braces for an internal brawl on net zero and nuclear power that could fracture the Coalition.

The commitment from the new Liberal leader, Sussan Ley, to review its entire policy agenda has raised the prospect the Coalition could abandon net zero by 2050, ending bipartisan political support for the long-term climate target.

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s breaking news email

Continue reading...

Wildfires are common in the state. But scientists say this week’s damaging blazes in a northeastern region are a sign of more severe effects from a warning planet.

The Trump administration is trying to claw back billions in climate grants, including $147 million that could help people in Puerto Rico withstand frequent power failures.

Familia Torres has been making wine in Catalonia since 1870, but says it may have to move to higher altitudes in 30 years’ time

A leading European winemaker has warned it may have to abandon its ancestral lands in Catalonia in 30 years’ time because climate change could make traditional growing areas too dry and hot.

Familia Torres is already installing irrigation at its vineyards in Spain and California and is planting vines on land at higher altitudes as it tries to adapt to more extreme conditions.

Continue reading...

In an internal memo to staff on Friday, the central bank’s chair, Jerome H. Powell, said it would offer a voluntary deferred resignation program.

Individuals and small businesses may end up bearing some of the cost of grid upgrades needed for large electricity users, a new report found.

In California, a home insurance rate increase by State Farm is yet another sign of growing crisis driven by climate change.

Record-high heat so early in the season means state has been hotter than Death Valley, the hottest place on Earth

Texas is in the grip of an extraordinary heatwave this week, with record-breaking temperatures sweeping across the central and southern regions of the state.

While 100F days are common in Texas summers, such early-season heat is unusual. The record-high heat means that Texas has been recently hotter than Death Valley, California, which is often cited as the hottest place on Earth.

Continue reading...

Ministers must resist pressure to relax environmental standards in the rush for new housing

Almost two decades after the last Labour government announced a zero carbon homes standard, and with the breaking of temperature records around the world now so normal as to seem routine, it ought to be uncontroversial that new buildings should be as environmentally friendly as possible. Given everything we know about global heating, and the law obliging the UK to reach net zero by 2050, it is disturbing that even the basics of promoting energy security and efficiency continue to be questioned.

But that is the situation Britain faces, as the government lays the ground for a housebuilding spree that it hopes will last for the rest of this parliament (as planning is devolved, the target of 1.5m new homes is for England only). Much of the blame for this discouraging state of affairs lies with the Tories, who delayed progress towards sustainability by scrapping environmental rules, leading to a disgraceful proliferation of new developments where the houses do not even have solar panels on the roofs.

Continue reading...

In May through October, the United States and its Caribbean territories experience their worst climate impacts—a time we call Danger Season. As I write this, 62 percent of the people living in the country have faced some kind of extreme weather alert since May 1—including flood warnings along the East Coast and mid-Atlantic, extreme heat warnings in Texas, and wildfire danger in the Midwest, Northern Plains and Southwest. As Danger Season cranks up, we will likely see many more extreme events—and some of them will require the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to rescue people and help them recover. 

The FEMA Review Council’s deadline for public comments on how to improve FEMA is May 15. President Trump established the council on January 24 to get its advice on what changes to FEMA “best serve the national interest.” However, their track record thus far sets off alarm bells that this could just be a rigged process to further undermine and dismantle FEMA. While the president waited three months to finalize the members of the council, the president and DHS Secretary Noem were busy issuing chaotic threats and directives to hobble the agency, followed by abruptly firing the Acting FEMA Administrator, Cameron Hamilton. Hamilton was replaced by David Richardson, formerly the Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) assistant secretary for countering weapons of mass destruction. Richardson has no former emergency management experience and on his first day warned FEMA staff that “I will run right over” staff who resist changes. 

On May 20 the council will meet for the first time. While the meeting time (one hour) and agenda (swearing in members; leadership remarks; and council overview and structure) are minimal, it’s an important one to track, and if you’re interested you must register to attend virtually by May 19.

In an overwhelming show of interest in and support of FEMA, more than 12,400 individuals have submitted comments to the council. It’s clear that Americans across the country recognize the growing importance of competent federal emergency management, disaster response, and mitigation—something neither President Trump nor DHS Secretary Noem seem committed to.

Below are UCS’s comments to the FEMA Review Council, in which we underscore that any reforms to FEMA must be guided by science, equity, and the experience of disaster survivors, and not by political ideology.   

1. Strengthen FEMA and its internal systems 

• Advocate for returning FEMA to its cabinet-level authority: To help limit bureaucracy and increase efficiency the council should endorse the bipartisan FEMA Independence Act to return FEMA to a cabinet-level authority. As a stand-alone agency, FEMA will be enabled to be more mission-focused on disaster response, recovery, preparedness and mitigation and better targeted on these issues to more efficiently coordinate with federal agencies.  

• Advocate for robust funding for FEMA operations and staff: Given the increasing demands on the agency, the council must advocate for an increase in funding for FEMA’s operations and staffing. This will help address the agency’s critical operational needs, which are also adversely affected by a staffing gap. In 2022, FEMA and the Government Accountability Office (GAO) agreed this gap was at 35 percent, which translates into 6,200 positions. In 2025 the Congressional Research Service suggested this gap is likely much larger.  
   
  Now in President Trump’s second term, the attacks on the agency created a hostile work environment for FEMA’s staff, and the agency has lost an additional 2,000 personnel (200 were fired and 1,800 took early retirement). The council must advocate not only for restoring FEMA staff levels but increasing staff through rehiring and the hiring of new personnel. It must also ensure the agency has the budget it needs to do this, as well as continue critical trainings and again function in a comprehensive fashion and beyond moving from one disaster to another. 

• Modernize FEMA’s IT systems: The council should work with Congress to ensure FEMA has the resources and staff to advance a rapid implementation plan to modernize its IT systems in a timely fashion which will ensure better accountability of taxpayer dollars.  

• Restore FEMA’s National Advisory Councils: President Trump terminated FEMA’s National Advisory Council (NAC), Technical Mapping Advisory Council (TMAC) and National Dam Safety Review Board, all of which were established by acts of Congress. These advisory councils are critical to assisting FEMA with collecting unbiased, science-based analysis and providing invaluable recommendations. The council must recommend that the administration restore the NAC, the TMAC and the National Dam Safety Review Board. 

2. Improve FEMA’s role in disaster response and recovery

• Improve FEMA’s role in disaster response and recovery (and reject policies in FEMA’s April 12 Memo that guts federal disaster assistance to states and local jurisdictions): Individual Assistance (IA), Public Assistance (PA), and the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program (HMGP) are critical to FEMA’s recovery resources to communities after a declared disaster. 

• Develop a universal disaster assistance application: Extreme weather and climate-related disasters hit low-income and historically disadvantaged communities the hardest and they face a particularly daunting recovery after a disaster, especially under the current administration’s dismantling of FEMA staff and resources. The council must recommend that FEMA and Congress work to develop a universal disaster assistance application. The universal application has gained bipartisan support because it will remove unnecessary bureaucratic barriers and help communities receive federal resources more efficiently when it matters the most.  

• Improve disaster assistance for survivors with the greatest needs: The council must recommend that FEMA take immediate actions to:
  • sign an Interagency Agreement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to activate the Disaster Housing Assistance Program (DHAP) to provide these survivors with longer-term rental assistance;
  • address financial barriers that prevent low income survivors from utilizing FEMA’s Transitional Sheltering Assistance (TSA) hotel program;
  • protect displaced individuals from discrimination; and
  • work to get the universal application passed into law. 

• Improve FEMA’s Public Assistance (PA) program: The council must recommend that FEMA initiate and finalize a rulemaking updating its methodology for its cost estimate threshold for disasters, so that it better reflects the “cost of living of a jurisdiction’s response and recovery capabilities including its fiscal capacity.” Also, the council must adamantly reject the FEMA directive included in the April 12 memo that would apply an across the board, one-size fits all, four-fold increase to the PA indicator threshold. Instead, the council must investigate mechanisms that would reward those states and jurisdictions that work to reduce their risk. 

• Restore FEMA’s door-to-door canvassing: The council must recommend that the administration restore FEMA’s door-to-door canvassing during its on-the-ground response during and after disasters given how critical it is to helping elderly survivors and those with disabilities get the information they need to stay safe and receive help with the paperwork needed to access federal disaster aid.  

• Improve FEMA’s reimbursement system: The council must recommend that FEMA improve its reimbursement system to communities, so small and large communities, urban and rural alike, will not be left with the threat of going bankrupt. State representatives and FEMA’s National Advisory Committee’s (NAC) agree this change and others are needed to simplify the reimbursement process as well as funding and reporting processes. 

3. Restore resilience programs

• Restore and plus-up pre-disaster, resilience programs (particularly the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) Program and Funding for Flood Mitigation Assistance (FMA) 

• Restore and plus-up the BRIC Program: The council must work with President Trump and Congress to defend and plus-up the bipartisan BRIC program which makes communities more resilient and infrastructure stronger, and is a model example of cost-effective federal program. Yet surprisingly, in an over-reach move, the Trump administration last month ended funding for the BRIC program that he signed into law in his first term in 2018. This will leave communities less prepared even as disasters are mounting and as the Atlantic hurricane season, which starts June 1, is just a handful of weeks away. Additionally, the council should recommend a substantial increase to the 6 percent set aside from the disaster relief fund and combine this update with the two other BRIC bills (here and here) that have been introduced this Congress given the outstanding need and cost-effectiveness.  

• Establish a Resilience Hub Program: The council should recommend that Congress authorize and fund a new National Resilience Hub program at FEMA to help communities assist with emergency response. The FEMA program would establish minimum criteria for a community facility to be federally recognized as a resilience hub. Once the criteria are met, that facility would be eligible to receive federal resources to assist its operating and emergency response costs.  

• Establish an Extreme Heat Mitigation and Community Resilience Grant Program: The United States is facing a potentially staggering expansion of dangerous heat over the coming decades due to climate change. FEMA lacks a dedicated hazard mitigation program to help communities, especially those with the least resources, to mitigate extreme heat. We urge the council to recommend that Congress establish a new Extreme Heat Mitigation and Community Resilience grant program which would require eligible grantees to adopt an extreme heat preparedness plan to be eligible for funds. A federally funded, proactive approach to heat would keep people safer, support economic productivity, and create savings for healthcare systems across the country. 

4. Advocate for modernization and reform of National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)

• The council must recommend that Congress modernize NFIP to help keep people and communities safe, ensure wise use of taxpayer dollars, advance risk reduction measures and markedly increase flood risk communication. The modernization of NFIP must include but isn’t limited to: 
  • a flood insurance affordability policy that is means-tested;
  • encouragement and prioritization of risk reduction mitigation practices including natural and nature-based features that substantially reduce maladaptive practices to lessen flooding;
  • update and modernize flood risk data and mapping to ensure up-to-date mapping is available across the U.S. and incorporates the latest science on future conditions including climate change; and
  • for protective local building codes and zoning laws, informed by the latest science.  

• The council must urge FEMA to begin a rulemaking process to modernize the NFIP’s minimum floodplain management standards. The rulemaking is sorely needed to: 1) update the NFIP’s minimum building and land use criteria to require higher elevation standards in the special flood hazard area, incorporate standards to ensure critical infrastructure is more safely sited and designed, prohibit the ongoing practice of fill and build, among other changes; 2) incorporate climate change risks of extreme storms and sea level rise into flood risk maps to help keep people safe; 3) disclose past and ongoing flood risk to future homebuyers and renters; and 4) increase and expand flood mitigation support such as flood mitigation assistance grants, buyouts and increased cost of compliance, especially for those who have flooded repeatedly.  

• The council must recommend that FEMA implement the TMAC’s 2023 Annual Report which includes four critical recommendations on how to better define the Special Flood Hazard Area among other critical recommendations that would reduce flood losses and increase transparency on the flood risk impacts of climate change and proposed development to communities. 

5. Restore climate and equity to all FEMA standards, programs and guidance (including but not limited to): 

• The council must vigorously advocate that the administration restore the Federal Flood Risk Management Standard (FFRMS). The FFRMS is a standard that ensures federally funded projects are built to avoid future flooding and therefore ensures wise use of taxpayer dollars. In fact, the FFRMS is now less protective than the American Society of Civil Engineers’ (ASCE) Flood Resistant Design and Construction, “ASCE 24-24” 2024 edition of its flood hazard standard.  

• The council must recommend that FEMA rescind the recently released Local Mitigation Planning Policy Guide and reinstate the 2023 Policy Guide. The 2025 version follows the calls by the Trump administration to eliminate any mentions of climate change and equity-related language and eliminates “Planning for Climate Change and Equitable Outcomes”. While one could argue it does include related language, such FEMA guidance is too crucial not to have it mentioned in black and white. 

I truly hope the council will take our comments and so many of the thousands of other comments to heart, as so many people’s lives are at risk as we are in Danger Season and the Atlantic hurricane season is just weeks away. Take for example comments by: 

• Kevin Z, a state emergency management worker who was deployed with FEMA during Covid-19 response and endured 12-hour shifts 5 days a week. He spoke about how the FEMA staff “are the very definition of good public servants. I’ve seen them put service before self when it mattered most, and I can’t envision a disaster response, where people’s lives and property are at stake, without their involvement.” 

• Judith Macnak and Sandra Edwardson, who wrote about their positive and lifesaving experiences with FEMA following the Juneau, Alaska glacial outburst flood in August of 2024 that many of the families there are still recovering from. Judith stated, “Within a 1-week period of time, we went from registering with FEMA, having a home inspection of the damage, submitting the necessary documentation, to receiving a reimbursement for the repairs needed.” And Sandra stated “FEMA’s continued presence and commitment to providing both immediate relief and long-term solutions are essential to rebuilding our lives and restoring a sense of safety. Without these resources, we risk falling further into a cycle of destruction and rebuilding, never finding stability.”

• Carol Matthieson, a disabled senior living on Social Security and living with her disabled veteran son and another who has Down Syndrome, wrote about surviving Hurricane Helene and how critical FEMA’s hotel voucher was, so that they could stop living in her car. She said, “Without FEMA, I don’t know where we would be.” 

However, we need to be vigilant and keep our eyes wide open to the facts right in front of us. The two members chairing the committee are Secretary of Defense Peter Hegseth and DHS Secretary Noem. No matter how constructive the council’s draft recommendations end up being, any constructive recommendations that are contrary to the harmful ideology of this administration may never make it into the final report to President Trump. 

The silver lining as we enter Danger Season is that the bipartisan members of the House Transportation and Infrastructure (T&I) Committee have released a draft FEMA Reform bill that provides important policies to help ensure that FEMA’s work delivers for people around the country hit by disasters and offers further reforms to disaster assistance and recovery.  
 
We hope the FEMA Review Council will take seriously the comments they receive, as well as important input from other local and state stakeholders over the next few months. Kevin, Judith, Sandra and Carol speak for many of the disaster survivors out there. They need FEMA, and they don’t know where they’d be without it. 

Under David Keeling, a former UPS and Amazon executive, Osha is expected to thwart protections on extreme heat

As the US prepares for what could be another record-breaking hot summer, Donald Trump and his pick to lead the nation’s workplace safety agency are expected to derail the creation of the nation’s first-ever federal labor protections from extreme heat.

Trump in February nominated David Keeling to lead the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (Osha). Keeling formerly served as an executive at the United Parcel Service (UPS) and Amazon – both of which have faced citations from Osha for worker injuries and deaths amid heat exposure. The companies deny the deaths were heat-related.

Continue reading...

Moving migratory pied flycatchers further north to breed where food remained resulted in twice as many chicks

How do you help a migratory bird adapt to the climate crisis? One radical solution, as a team of Dutch ecologists discovered, is to move them further north.

Pied flycatchers are handsome black-and-white songbirds, which breed in deciduous woodlands across much of temperate Europe. Each autumn, they head south across the Sahara desert to overwinter in west Africa.

Continue reading...

The Trump administration has declared litigation to hold oil companies responsible for climate change a threat to the American economy and has taken aggressive steps to fight it.

The E.P.A. said it would maintain limits on the two most common “forever chemicals” in tap water. Rules for four others will be rolled back.

Daré accepted the £10,000 prize for her latest novel, And So I Roar, the follow-up to her bestselling debut The Girl with the Louding Voice

Nigerian writer Abi Daré has won the inaugural Climate fiction prize for her novel And So I Roar, the follow-up to her bestselling debut The Girl with the Louding Voice.

Daré was announced as the winner of the £10,000 prize at a ceremony in London on Wednesday evening.

Continue reading...

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Lee Zeldin is set to testify before Congress this week, and he should be held accountable for decimating bedrock environmental protections that keep our air clean, the water we drink safe, waterways we swim and fish in clean, and soil unpolluted, as he oversees massive staffing and budget cuts, an assault on agency science, and unprecedented loopholes for polluters.

The rhetoric from this administration that mischaracterizes core public health and environmental programs as wasteful or ideologically driven is a dangerous distortion of reality. Framing environmental protection as excessive or radical is a deliberate tactic to discredit science, weaken enforcement, and strip communities—especially frontline and low-income communities—of essential protections against pollution, climate risk, and environmental injustice.

In addition to all the harms that have already happened, now President Trump’s “skinny” budget for fiscal year 2026 proposes cutting EPA funding by a massive 54.5%, or $4.2 billion, and includes harmful, anti-science provisions such as cutting funding for state clean and drinking water programs, the hazardous substance Superfund program, and even removing air monitors at National Parks. If implemented, these cuts would represent a reckless and deeply unpopular assault on the health and safety of all Americans. Despite holding the power of the purse, Congress has thus far put up little resistance to President Trump’s overreach. 

Zeldin’s unprecedented assault on the EPA’s ability to deliver on its mission is entirely designed to prop up big polluters, including fossil fuel interests—while the rest of us pay the price. The American public—across the political spectrum—support clean air, water and land. According to a 2024 post-election poll sponsored by Environmental Protection Network, 88% of all voters, and 81% of Trump voters want Congress to increase EPA funding or at least keep funding steady.

As Zeldin goes up before Congress, here’s what lawmakers could ask him.

Question one

How do you expect to protect clean air, water and lands while acquiescing to the lowest EPA funding levels since the 1980s, including steep cuts to critical environmental programs, which would inevitably put our children’s health at risk and place the burden of cleanup on future generations?

President Trump’s proposed budget will put children, seniors, and frontline workers in harm’s way, and Congress should reject it. Cutting EPA’s budget by greater than 50% will result in higher asthma rates, more contaminated water systems, and delayed cleanups of toxic sites. And from a historical perspective, these cuts would lower EPA funding to levels not seen since the early years of EPA’s history (EPA was formed under President Richard Nixon in 1970) when its statutory mandate was much narrower.

Source: the Environmental Protection Network

Over the past 40 years, regardless of political persuasion, presidential administrations have generally recognized EPA’s vital function and funded it accordingly.  The Trump 2026 proposal constitutes an abdication of environmental governance and mocks the thoughtful, intentional, hard-fought process of setting up a system upholding public health priorities.  

The White House’s EPA budget shows an absolute and irreverent disregard for their responsibilities to the American people. There’s a proposed 89 percent cut to EPA’s bipartisan water infrastructure programs. And major cuts to noncompetitive state passthrough grants.

No doubt, states will be forced to shoulder responsibilities once backed by robust federal programs, from clean water enforcement to toxic site cleanups, all while facing rising pollution, public health crises, and climate-related disasters. The result will be patchwork protections, deepening inequities, and greater risk for every community, especially those least able to absorb the blow.

Imagine the smokestack across the state line making your child’s asthma attacks worse, or your swim in the river unsafe because of water pollution from the state upstream.

Question 2

During your confirmation hearing, you promised to “defer to scientists,” yet you have repeatedly undercut science-based public health protections, distorted scientific facts and undermined scientific expertise at the EPA. How do you intend to ensure that the EPA’s actions to protect our health are guided by the best available science?

Administrator Zeldin is also seeking to undermine and eliminate scientific expertise and evidence, giving the Trump administration a way to avoid taking action to cut pollution despite the overwhelming proof of harms to people. By bypassing regulatory processes and silencing scientific expertise, the Trump administration is seeking to gut efforts to address the impacts and economic damage caused by climate change, and the impacts of toxics exposures to the American people. All to protect the profits of the oil, gas and chemical industries at our expense.

Source: the Environmental Protection Network Question 3

You say the environment will be safer for all and “a cleaner planet for future generations”. How will EPA protect communities most in danger from pollution if there is no staff or budget in the environmental justice program left to help while you expend taxpayer dollars to dig up dirt for your appeals in the courts? 

The EPA’s environmental justice office was created to challenge the historic pattern of pollution disproportionately harming low-income communities and communities of color. The office’s work is based on robust research that identifies communities most affected by pollution. Scientific data shows that, due to historic and ongoing injustices, communities overburdened by polluting industries, smog-forming traffic, and contaminated waterways and soil are home to predominantly low-income, Black, Brown and Indigenous people. Exposure to consistently higher levels of pollution increases the risk of asthma, heart and lung ailments, cancer and even death. Prioritizing limited public resources into the most overburdened communities is efficient governance.

EPA received $3 billion for Climate and Environmental Justice Block Grants through the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) and also had been given clear direction from the previous administration to more fairly distribute the benefits of environmental protections across the country. After doing their jobs of getting sorely needed money to communities, while complying with abundant government regulations on contracts and grants, employees were vilified, and their grantees were denied their rightfully executed funding agreements. Promises made were broken. Despite numerous court orders to turn IRA funding back on, Zeldin’s EPA has repeatedly denied funding, and instead terminated nearly 800 grants, all with environmental justice in the descriptions, without demonstrating mismanagement or negligence. Although an agency official stated that they did “an individualized, grant-by-grant review” to satisfy court orders, it is hard to see how that was possible.

Not only has Zeldin gone after the $3 billion IRA Climate and Environmental Justice grants, he has targeted $20 million of the Greenhouse Gas Reduction Fund. He has repeatedly alleged falsehoods and set the investigative power of government on a witch hunt to find fraud, waste and abuse. It seems that EPA and the Trump administration would rather search for evidence to support their legal appeals, while communities suffer the effects of climate change caused by the very greenhouse gases this program was designed to prevent.

Simultaneously, Zeldin’s team has announced their intent to shutter EPA’s Office of Environmental Justice and External Civil Rights (OEJECR) and regional environmental justice divisions by laying off or reorganizing staff effective July 31. This means leaving those living, working, studying, and playing near polluting industries, smog-forming traffic, and contaminated waterways and soil with little support from the very agency they rely on to enforce protective laws.

Thousands of people have been intimidated into resigning through the Department of Government Efficiency’s (DOGE) infamous “fork in the road,” terminating recent hires, suggesting all scientists be reclassified from positions with career civil service protections into ones that allow for easy removal, much like political positions (formerly known as “Schedule F”). The words of Russell Vought, the head of the White House Office of Management and Budget, about intentionally traumatizing federal workers, should set off alarm bells of our appropriators in Congress.

Once again, the Trump administration is sidelining both science and programs to assist the nation’s most overburdened people.

Question 4

Bedrock clean air and water protections are designed to take account of the latest science, but you’ve signaled your intent to scrap science-based standards and question the scope of EPA’s clear statutory obligations. Are you planning on taking EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation back to the 1970s?

The EPA’s Office of Air and Radiation (OAR) leads a large share of the regulatory work of EPA, required by the Clean Air Act statute. In the 1970s the Clean Air Act covered only four chemicals, now it’s in the hundreds – not to mention the threat of climate change.

A recent study showed that rollbacks of just a subset of these regulations would lead to nearly 200,000 premature deaths by 2050 (think 20 sports arenas-full) and at least 10,000 asthma attacks every day. And the cost? For every dollar saved by corporate polluters, it would create six dollars of cost to the public from things like health care bills and the loss of a longer, healthier life—and that doesn’t even capture many known but difficult to quantify impacts.

The work of the OAR is being threatened through a drastic reorganization plan, which seeks to eliminate its Atmospheric Protection Program and disrupt other parts. The reorganization is planned with Zeldin on record saying there will be a focus on state air programs (a.k.a. expedited permitting of polluting projects). UCS has been tracking the administration’s deregulatory agenda, focusing on key regulations such as carbon rules for power plants and those limiting vehicle emissions.

Zeldin is also proposing to eradicate the climate-related voluntary programs, like the industry supported, popular Energy Star appliance labeling program that delivers huge benefits for consumers’ pocketbooks. He would also eliminate reporting programs for greenhouse gases.

Question 5

How do you expect businesses to navigate the unfair playing field you have created and stay competitive when some have complied with regulations and others can look for a free pass?

The EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and all regional enforcement directors received notice in March that they should not follow any previous guidance documents, particularly where there are EJ concerns. Moreover, they have specific limitations on enforcing for example, methane releases coal ash contamination, reducing air toxics and pollution, and reducing risks of chemical accidents. The preeminence of oil and gas industry interests is laced throughout, as further detailed by my colleague Julie McNamara.

The effect? Enforcement cases have already dropped compared to prior administrations. Not only that, the President’s skinny budget would erase $1 billion in categorical (noncompetitive) grants across all 50 states, which provide the funding to enforce federal clean air, water, and waste rules.

And, let’s not forget the Clean Air Act hotline set up for companies to request presidential waivers. These waivers ensure that certain favored companies can operate outside the law.

Question 6

Can you explain how you plan on meeting EPA’s mission that demands unbiased science while cutting the Office of Research and Development’s budget and proposing to dismantle it?

EPA’s Research and Development Office produces independent science that’s used to keep people safe from pollution and chemical exposure. Industry doesn’t always like what’s coming out of this office. Dismantling this office by cutting its budget by $235 million and planning to remove more than 1,000 staff is a dangerous move during a period of intensifying environmental threats, wildfires, flooding, and other climate change impacts.

UCS has pointed out the threats to human health and the environment from the loss of a one-of-its-kind program, the Integrated Risk Information System (IRIS), which provides independent reviews of chemicals like formaldehyde or ethylene oxide tied to certain health effects, like cancer. IRIS assessments are known to be a gold standard in toxicity reviews. Read this fact sheet for more information.  

Question 7

According to post-2024 election polling data, 88% of voters, including 81% of Trump voters, support maintaining or increasing EPA funding. So, who exactly is served by these cuts, and why are you ignoring the public’s clear demand for stronger environmental protections?

If Administrator Zeldin goes forward with this destructive move, he will be responsible for ending decades of work intended to help set right the harmful legacy of pollution in overburdened communities in a handout to big polluters. This is also part of the Trump administration’s larger ongoing strategy to dismantle EPA and its core functions and undermine its very mission, which is to help keep all people in America safe.

Congress can and should hold Administrator Zeldin accountable

During this week’s hearings with Administrator Zeldin, Congress should stand up and take back the power of the purse. Congress must see the proposed budget for the sham that it is and hold Zeldin accountable for his promises to protect public health and the environment during his confirmation hearings. Members of Congress must show Zeldin they understand—even if he’s forgotten— the importance of EPA as a longstanding investment in our health and safety, and see through the ruse of “fiscal responsibility” and “streamlining” as just code words to gut the agency. The administration knows, and history shows, that industry will not regulate itself.

We urge lawmakers to reject these shortsighted and harmful reductions, restore critical EPA funding, and reaffirm the federal commitment to public health, environmental justice, and scientific integrity. If they don’t act, under Zeldin’s watch, the very mission of the agency will be subverted—from protecting public health, environmental justice and scientific integrity to becoming an instrument of unchecked polluting industry interests. The cost of inaction will be measured in lives, livelihoods, and long-term environmental damage.

A new exhibition in the Brazilian city looks at how water, the environment and extreme weather is interwoven with personal stories from 10 marginalised communities

Leticia Pinheiro grew up hearing stories about the Acari River. Her grandmother bathed in its clean waters; her father caught frogs on its margins; and many in the community made a living from fishing there.

Now, Pinheiro, 28, and her peers do not even call it a river; it’s become known as a valão – an open canal for sewage and rubbish. It borders the Acari favela, which spread over swampy terrain in northern Rio de Janeiro from the 1920s.

Continue reading...

Research shows companies ‘aligned’ with strategies to meet climate goals have risen from 3% in 2019 to 23% in 2025

European companies are increasingly lobbying for strong climate action, research has found, in a “profound shift” that analysts say challenges the narrative that businesses see green rules as a threat to profits.

The share of companies whose corporate lobbying is “aligned” with pathways to meet global climate goals rose from 3% in 2019 to 23% in 2025, according to an analysis of 200 of the largest European companies by InfluenceMap, while the share of companies who were deemed “misaligned” fell from 34% to 14%.

Continue reading...