New Documents Show the Trump Administration Cut Climate Change Impacts from its Energy Plan

Shocker.

Aaron Lavinsky/ZUMA

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

Thus far, the Trump administration has seemed to make it a point to ignore the very real threat of global warming in its policy and unabashedly censor climate science on government websites, reports, and speeches. It should come as a shock to no one, then, that the administration’s recent rollback of the Obama-era Clean Power Plan, has been no different—and gives even more cause for alarm among environmentalists.

Introduced in 2015, the Obama administration’s ambitious environmental program would have regulated coal-burning power plants and heavily reduced carbon emissions in the coming decades. But, in October 2017, Trump’s Environmental Protection Agency announced its intention to repeal the Clean Power Plan, and in late August, it had a replacement: the dramatically weaker “Affordable Clean Energy” proposal.

Now, a draft version of the proposal released Friday reveals the Trump administration has removed mentions of climate science that were included in earlier iterations of the plan.

A previous draft, sent to the Office of Management and Budget in July, included phrases like “global average surface temperatures,” “sea level rise,” and “the burning of fossil fuels” in its impact analysis. By August, those sections—hundreds of words that warned of the growing threat of climate change—were cut from the final, 289-page analysis.

Now, all that remains in that section of the impact assessment is a paragraph that vaguely mentions the threat of greenhouse gases:

In 2009, EPA Administrator found that elevated concentrations of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere may reasonably be anticipated both to endanger public health and to endanger public welfare. It is these adverse impacts that necessitate EPA regulation of GHGs from EGU sources. Since 2009, other science assessments suggest accelerating trends.

It’s unclear exactly why the language was cut. According to Bloomberg, the EPA acknowledged general revisions during a review period, but offered little explanation. “As a result of the interagency review process, a number of changes were made to the proposed ACE rule and its accompanying materials,” said an EPA spokesperson. “EPA looks forward to receiving comment on a variety of these issues during the public comment period.”

The impact analysis, however, was clear about one thing: the threat of air pollution from cars. As my colleague Dan Spinelli reports, by its own estimates, the EPA’s new plan would cause between 470 to 1,400 more deaths by 2030 thanks to an increase in air pollution, and would only reduce carbon emissions by up to 1.5 percent from projected levels—far lower than what Obama’s plan would accomplish.

“This administration has a long history of attempting to censor the science underpinning our most important health and environmental protections,” said Tomás Carbonell, the director of regulatory policy at the Environmental Defense fund, in a statement Tuesday. “And this seems to be an egregious example of that. Climate change is a clear and present danger to all Americans and ignoring it is not an option.”

The EPA is currently taking comments on the Affordable Clean Energy proposal.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate